Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 3:1
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
Ch. Rom 3:1-2. The advantage of the Jew: Revelation
1. What advantage ] Lit. what excess, i. e. of privilege.
St Paul here corrects, though only in passing, the possible inference from the previous passage that circumcision was valueless in all respects, and that the Jew as such had nothing special to thank God for. It is remarkable that his chief reply to such a thought lies in the fact that the Old Covenant secured the immense practical benefit of Revelation. (Cp. Psa 103:7.) This correction is aside from the main argument of this part of the Epistle, in which St Paul aims to prove the equality of Jew and Gentile not in respect of privilege but in respect of reality of guilt, and of need of a Divine justification. Yet even here the main argument is not forgotten: the gift of Scripture brings the responsibility of the Jew into the fullest light. His “advantage” is his accusation.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
What advantage … – The design of the first part of this chapter is to answer some of the objections which might be offered by a Jew to the statements in the last chapter. The first objection is stated in this verse. A Jew would naturally ask, if the view which the apostle had given were correct, what special benefit could the Jew derive from his religion? The objection would arise particularly from the position advanced Rom 2:25-26, that if a pagan should do the things required by the Law, he would be treated as if he had been circumcised. Hence, the question, what profit is there of circumcision?
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Rom 3:1-2
What advantage then hath the Jew?
chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Moral advantage
I. There is much advantage to those favoured with clearer light and higher privilege, in every respect. They have the advantage–
1. Of feeling that God cares for them. The heathen had, some of them, lost the knowledge of God altogether, and others were only dimly conscious of His goodness.
2. Of a superior temporal condition. They are delivered from the miseries inflicted by cruel superstitions, are able to cheek the progress of debasing immoralities, and to promote freedom, comfort, peace, and brotherhood.
3. Of better opportunity of performing what their better position demands. The man who possessed five talents had the advantage over his fellow. He had a better command of the market, and could stand a greater shock of adverse circumstances. They would help each other to grow; for five united are more than five times as strong as one, and more than two-and-a-half times as strong as two. An Israelite or a Christian may walk uprightly in his noonday light more easily than a heathen may walk at all in his dim twilight.
4. Of attaining, if faithful, an absolutely higher reward. As two statesmen of equal desert, and equally in favour, take higher and lower positions on account of their different capacities, so those who receive equally the Kings commendation, Well done, good and faithful servant, shall yet differ, as one star differeth from another, in glory.
II. The greatest advantage is to have the oracles of God.
1. The knowledge they impart is a blessing. As day is more blessed than night; as freedom for thought is better than the fetters of ignorance, so the possession of these oracles is unspeakably better than deprivation of them.
2. It is a blessing to have assured Divine communication. As the spirit of a plebeian is lifted by a word or a look from his king; as the heart of an absent child is gladdened by the outside of his fathers letter, so is man blessed by the fact that God has spoken to him.
3. It is an advantage to be thus taken into peculiar covenant relationship to God. Every precept of these oracles is a condition of some blessedness which God pledges Himself to bestow; and every promise contains Gods oath of faithfulness to all to whom these oracles come. It is a high advantage to know that we are Gods and God is ours, as we grasp in faith and obedience His sacred Word. Over our higher privileges it becomes us to rejoice with trembling. With all thy responsibilities, thy greater required service, and thy heavier doom if faithless, still Happy art thou, O Israel, satisfied with favour, and full with the blessing of the Lord. (W. Griffiths.)
Moral advantage
1. Man has unspeakable advantage in the possession of the oracles of God.
2. May lose it through unbelief.
3. Cannot thereby invalidate Gods faithfulness.
4. Must ultimately confess and justify it. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
The surplus of privilege
The following supposed cases may serve to explain the force of the question raised, and replied to in the text: If the scholarships at Oxford or Cambridge are given away irrespective of the seminaries from which the candidates come, what relative advantage has a youth educated at one of our public schools over and above another who is sell-taught, and with few helps? Much every way; for he has had the best text books, skilled masters, and the like. Or, again, suppose a philanthropist should undertake the reformation of the waifs and strays of society in his own neighbourhood, and for this purpose were to select certain youths whom he received into an institution where they were fed, clothed, and specially trained. Now if, after a while, the person in question should throw open the doors of this establishment, would not there still be a surplus of privilege belonging to those whom he had first admitted?–would not the care and instruction which they had already enjoyed raise them above their fellows, and fit them for being the most qualified instruments in the carrying out of their benefactors liberal-minded and large-hearted designs? (C. Nell, M. A.)
The advantages of Christians over heathens
I. What they are.
1. A guide for faith.
2. A warrant for hope.
3. A rule for conduct.
II. The improvement we should make of them.
1. Study.
2. Obey.
3. Diffuse. (C. Simeon, M. A.)
The advantage of possessing the Holy Scriptures
I. The appellation here given to the Holy Scriptures–the oracles of God.
1. There seems to be an allusion to the heathen oracles. These were, indeed, merely pretended communications from gods that had no existence; or, perhaps, in some instances real communications from demons, and the answers which were given were generally expressed in such unintelligible, or equivocal phrases as might easily be wrested to prove the truth of the oracles whatever the truth might be (Act 16:16).
2. But the apostles, when they term the Scriptures oracles (Act 7:38; Heb 5:12; 1Pe 4:11), signify that they are real revelations from the true God. These were communicated–viva voce, as when God spake to Moses face to face–in visions, as when a prophet in an ecstacy had supernatural revelations (Gen 15:1; Gen 46:2; Eze 11:24; Dan 8:2)–in dreams, as those of Jacob (Gen 28:12) and Joseph (Gen 37:5-6)–by Urim and Thummim, which was a way of knowing the will of God by the ephod or breastplate of the high priest. After the building of the temple, Gods will was generally made known by prophets Divinely inspired, and who were made acquainted with it in different ways (1Ch 9:20-21).
3. The apostles, giving the Scriptures this appellation, show that they considered them as containing Gods mind and will (2Ti 3:16; 1Pe 1:10-13; 1Pe 1:23; 1Pe 1:25; 2Pe 1:19-21). And these apostles, being themselves inspired (Joh 14:17; Joh 14:26; Joh 15:26; Joh 16:13) could not be mistaken. Christ Himself has borne a clear testimony to the truth and importance of the Scriptures of the Old Testament (Joh 5:39; Joh 10:35; Luk 16:29; Luk 16:31).
4. Other proofs of their inspiration are–the majesty of their style; the evident truth and authority of their doctrines; the harmony of all their parts; their power on the minds of myriads; the accomplishment of their prophecies; the miracles performed by their authors. If these things can be affirmed of the writing of the Old Testament, how much more of the New, which consist of the discourses of Gods Incarnate Truth (Heb 1:1), and of His Divinely commissioned servants (Eph 4:7-13).
II. The advantages those have above others, who are favoured with them.
1. There are many truths of vast importance which may be known from Gods works (Rom 1:19-20); nevertheless, matter of fact has proved that even as to the most obvious and primary truths, all flesh have corrupted their way. If the existence of a Deity has been generally acknowledged, yet His unity and spirituality has not, but the most civilised nations have multiplied their gods without end (Rom 1:21-24; hence Isa 40:19-20; Isa 41:6-7; Isa 44:12-20). As to the accountableness of man, fatalism on the one hand, and self-sufficiency on the other, prevailed even among the Greeks and Romans; as to the distinction between vice and virtue, we refer to the apostle (Rom 1:26-32). And as to a future state of happiness or misery, they were in general without hope.
2. But if these and such like truths could have been discovered by the light of nature, they are taught in Scripture much more clearly and fully; with more authority and certainty; and in a way more adapted to the condition of mankind, who in general have neither capacity nor time for deep and difficult research. Many other truths of equal importance, which are not known at all by the light of nature, are clearly revealed in the Scriptures.
3. The oracles of God may well be called by St. Stephen lively. Gods word is a hammer and fire, quick and powerful (Heb 4:12), spirit and life (Joh 6:63). They partake of the spiritual, living, and powerful nature of Him, from whom they proceed. The God who gave them is still at hand to give the right understanding and feeling of them (Luk 24:45; 2Pe 1:20), and still works by and with them. Hence men, from age to age, have been pricked, cut to the heart (Act 2:37; Act 5:33), begotten (Jam 1:18), born again (1Pe 1:23), set free (Joh 8:32), made clean (Joh 15:3), sanctified (Joh 17:17; Eph 5:26), built up and made perfect by them (Eph 4:12; 2Ti 3:15).
4. But here arises a grand objection; the Jews, though favoured with the oracles of God, were as wicked as the Gentiles (chap. 2); professing Christians are as wicked as the heathen. This is by no means the case. A very favourable change in the manners of men in general has been wrought where the Scriptures have been received; and myriads, both Jews and Christians, have thereby been made truly pious persons in all ages; and with respect to the rest, if some did not believe, shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? (verse 3).
III. Our obligation to improve this advantage for ourselves and to communicate it to others.
1. The oracles of God can only profit those who believe them (Heb 3:11; Heb 4:2). They must also be considered and laid to heart, otherwise they cannot profit an intelligent and free being, for they do not work upon our minds mechanically. We must bring to their consideration a teachable and serious mind; must receive them with reverence, gratitude, and affection; practise the religion they describe; and, in order to all this, pray to Him that gave them, that He may impart to us the Spirit by whose influences alone we can either understand or comply with them.
2. With respect to others–the oracles of God are equally necessary and designed for all men (Psa 22:27; Isa 2:2; Mic 4:1; Isa 11:9; Isa 60:8; Isa 06:9; Luk 24:47; Mar 16:15; Rom 1:5; Rev 14:6-7). All professing Christians are under an obligation to aid their circulation, that their endeavours may be consistent with their prayers, for they pray that His kingdom may come. (Joseph Benson.)
The advantages and disadvantages of having the Divine oracles compared: a plea for missions
I. To whom much is given much will be required; the question, then, is whether it is better, that it shall be given or withheld.
1. The Jew, who sinned against the light of his revelation, will have a severer retribution than the Gentile who only sinned against the light of his own conscience; and the nations of Christendom who have rejected the gospel will incur a darker doom than the native of China, whose remoteness, while it shelters him from the light of the New Testament in this world, shelters him from the pain of its fulfilled denunciations in another. And with these considerations a shade of uncertainty appears to pass over the question–whether the Christianisation of a people ought at all to be meddled with.
2. But without an authoritative solution of this question from God, we are really not in circumstances to determine it. We have not all the materials of the question before us. We know not how to state what the addition is which knowledge confers upon the sufferings of disobedience; or how far an accepted gospel exalts the condition of him who was before a stranger to it. It is all a matter of revelation on which side the difference lies; and he who is satisfied to be wise up to that which is written will quietly repose upon the deliverance of Scripture on this subject. Go and preach the gospel to every creature under heaven, and go unto all the world, and teach all nations. These parting words of our Saviour may not be enough to quell the anxieties of the speculative Christian, but they are quite enough to decide the conduct of the practical Christian.
3. But the verses before us advance one step farther, and enter on the question of profit and loss attendant on the possession of the oracles of God; and to decide, on the part of the former, that the advantage was much every way. And it is not for those individuals alone who reaped the benefit that the apostle makes the calculation. He makes an abatement for the unbelief of all the others; and, balancing the difference, he lands us in a computation of clear gain to the whole people. And it bears importantly on this question; for surely we may well venture to circulate these oracles when told of the most stiff-necked and rebellious people on earth, that, with all their abuse of them, they conferred a positive advantage on their nation. And yet what a fearful deduction from this advantage must have been made by their wickedness. It were hard to tell the amount of aggravation upon all their sin, in that it was sin against the light of the oracles of God; but the apostle tells us that, let the amount be what it may, it was more than countervailed by the positive good done through these oracles.
II. A few remarks both on the speculative and on the practical part of this question.
1. The Bible, when brought into a new country, may be instrumental in saving those who submit to its doctrine; and, in so doing, it saves them from an absolute condition of misery in which they were previously involved. If along with this advantage to those who receive it, it aggravates the condition of those who reject it, it does not change into wretchedness that which before was enjoyment; and the whole amount of the evil that has been rendered is only to be computed by the difference in degree between the suffering that is laid upon sin with, and sin without the knowledge of the Saviour. We do not know how great the difference is, but we gather that it was better for the Jews, in spite of all the deeper responsibility and guilt which their possession of the Old Testament laid upon the disobedient, yet that a net accession of gain was thus rendered to the whole–then may we infer that any enterprise by which the Bible is more extensively circulated, or taught, is of positive benefit to every neighbourhood.
2. Though in Jewish history they were the few to whom the oracles of God were a blessing, and the many to whom they were an additional condemnation–yet, on the whole, the good so predominated over the evil, that it on the whole was for the better and not for the worse that they possessed these oracles. But the argument gathers in strength as we look onward to futurity, as we dwell upon the fact of the universal prevalence of the gospel of Christ. Even in this day of small things, the direct blessing which follows in the train of a circulated Bible and a proclaimed gospel overbalances the incidental evil; and when we think of the latter-day glory which it ushers in, who should shrink from the work of hastening it forward, because of a spectre conjured up from the abyss of human ignorance? Even did the evil now predominate over the good, still is a missionary enterprise like a magnanimous daring for a great moral and spiritual achievement, which will at length reward the perseverance of its devoted labourers. There are collateral evils attendant on the progress of Christianity. At one time it brings a sword instead of peace, and at another it stirs up a variance in families, and at all times does it deepen the guilt of those who resist the overtures which it makes to them. But these are only the perils of a voyage that is richly laden with the moral wealth of many future generations. These are but the hazards of a battle which terminates in the proudest and most productive of all victories–and, if the liberty of a great empire be an adequate return for the loss of the lives of its defenders, then is the glorious liberty of the children of God, which will at length be extended over the face of a still enslaved and alienated world, more than an adequate return for the spiritual loss that is sustained by those who, instead of fighting for the cause, have resisted and reviled it.
III. Conclude with a few practical remarks.
1. It is with argument such as this that we would meet the anti-missionary spirit, Not long ago Christianising enterprise was traduced as a kind of invasion on the safety and innocence of paganism, and it was affirmed that, though idolatry is blind, yet it were better not to awaken its worshippers, than to drag them forth by instruction to the hazards and the exposures of a more fearful responsibility. But why should we be restrained now from the work by a calculation, which did not restrain the missionaries of two thousand years ago?
2. If man is to be kept in ignorance because every addition of light brings along with it an addition of responsibility–then ought the species to be arrested at home as well as abroad in its progress towards a more exalted state of humanity; and such evils as may attend the transition to moral and religious knowledge, should deter us from every attempt to rescue our own countrymen from any given amount of darkness by which they may now be encompassed.
3. However safe it is to commit the oracles of God into the hands of others, yet, considering ourselves in the light of those to whom these oracles are committed, it is a matter of urgent concern whether, to us personally, the gain or the loss will predominate. It resolves itself, with every separate individual, into the question of his secured heaven, or his more aggravated hell–whether he be of the some who turn the message of God into an instrument of conversion; or of the many who, by neglect and unconcern, render it the instrument of their sorer condemnation. (T. Chalmers, D. D.)
The oracles of God
I. Their leading characters.
1. Absolute truth and wisdom. The word oracles signifies a Divine speech or answer. Words professing to be from God ought to have strong evidence; and how mighty and commanding is the evidence–attested by miracle, ratified by the fulfilment of prophecy, continuing when they have for ages reproved the world, giving life and salvation to this hour. If, then, they are from God, the question of their wisdom and truth is settled. And here is the advantage of possessing these oracles. There is not a question relating either to duty or salvation to which there is not here an answer. Are you an inquirer? There is the oracle. Consult it; for it shall speak, and shall not lie.
2. Infinite importance. On those questions which are merely curious the oracle is silent, but on no subject which it behoves us to know, e.g., the character of God; the laws by which we are governed; the true state of man; rescue and redemption; the practical application and attainment of this mercy.
3. Life. Hence they are called lively or living oracles, or as our Lord says, The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. No other book has this peculiarity. Show me one which all the wicked fear; which cuts deep into the conscience, and rouses salutary fears; which comforts and supports; and whilst its blessed truths quiver on the lips of the dying, disarms death of its sting. Show me a man who, when he discourses, awakens souls from deadly sleep; who to a trembling spirit says, Believe, and live, and he actually believes and lives; whose counsel effectually guides, quickens, and comforts; and you show me one who speaks only as the oracles of God. Among all who have been celebrated for oratory, who ever professed to produce effects like these? Nothing explains this but the life which the Spirit imparts. With the oracles of God the Author is present. You cannot avoid this power. It will make the Word either a savour of life unto life, or a savour of death unto death.
4. They make all other oracles vocal.
(1) Nature has its solemn voice, but it is not heard where the gospel is not. In heathendom the very heavens are turned into idols, and God is excluded from the thoughts of men. But whenever the living oracles come, then every star, and mountain, and river, proclaims its glorious Maker: day unto day uttereth speech.
(2) The general providence of God in the government of nations is intended to display the wisdom, power, goodness, justice, and truth of God; and terminate in the conversion of all nations to the faith of Christ. Yet all this is unknown to those who are destitute of the Divine oracles. To them it appears that one event happens to all. Every occurrence is either attributed to chance, to blind fate, or to the caprice of deities without Wisdom, and without mercy. The living oracle gives a voice to all this. Instructed by it we mark the design of God, who worketh all in all. We see all things tending to one end, the glory of the Lord shall be revealed; and all flesh shall see it together.
(3) There is also a particular providence which appoints us our station in life, our blessings and our sorrows. Many lessons this providence is intended to teach us. The goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance. But till the living oracle speaks, all is silence; and we derive no lessons of true wisdom from the events of life. When we acquaint ourselves with God in His Word, then everything ministers to our instruction in righteousness.
5. Variety. Here we have history, proverbs, poetry, examples, doctrine, prophecy, parable, allegory, and metaphor.
6. Fulness of truth. Great as are the revelations, nothing is exhausted. As in Christ the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily, to be eternally manifested; so in His Word there is a fulness of truth. And hence the Bible is always new.
(1) In regard to morals, we have principles, as well as acts, applicable forever.
(2) Who can exhaust the doctrine of Holy Scripture? Doctrines especially relating to God, and Christ, and the depth of all-redeeming love.
(3) The effects of the whole scheme will be developing forever. In a very important sense the Bible will be the oracles of God to the Church above.
II. These oracles are committed or entrusted To You.
1. To be read and understood, consequently there is great guilt in treating them with indifference and neglect.
2. To interpret honestly. They are the oracles of God; and it is a sin of no ordinary magnitude to pervert their meaning.
3. To make them known to others. It is a great sin to restrain the Scriptures.
III. Their advantage.
1. Instruction.
2. Direction.
3. Salvation. (Richard Watson.)
The oracles of God
I. The oracles of God.
1. The meaning of the term.
(1) Among heathen the word was first used to denote the answers supposed to be given by their gods, and was afterwards applied to the shrines where such answers were given. Whether these answers were forged by the priests, or were the results of diabolical agency, it is not necessary to inquire. Suffice it that though proverbially obscure, they are regarded with veneration and confidence. No enterprise of importance was undertaken without consulting them; splendid embassies, with magnificent presents, were sent from far distant states, with a view to obtain a propitious answer; and contending nations often submitted to them the decision of their respective claims. With these facts the Gentile converts were acquainted; in these opinions they had participated. The word, therefore, could scarcely fail to excite in them some of the ideas and emotions with which it had been so long and intimately associated. No title, then, could be better adapted to inspire them with veneration for the Scriptures.
(2) Nor would it appear less sacred, or important to the Jew, associated as it was with the Urim and Thummim, and with those responses which Jehovah gave from the inner sanctuary. In our version this place is frequently styled The Oracle; and the answers which God there gave to the inquiries of His worshippers were full, explicit, and definite; forming a perfect contrast to the oracles of paganism. By employing this language, he did in effect say to the Gentile converts, All that you once supposed the oracles of your countrymen to be, the Scriptures really are. With at least equal force did his language say to the Jews, The Scriptures are no less the Word of God than were the answers which He formerly gave to your fathers from the mercy seat.
2. This title is given to the Scriptures with perfect truth and propriety. They do not, indeed, resemble in all respects the heathen oracles. They were never designed to gratify a vain curiosity; much less to subserve the purposes of ambition or avarice, and this is, probably, one reason why many persons never consult them. But whatever a mans situation may be, this oracle, if consulted in the manner in which God has prescribed, will satisfactorily answer every question which it is proper for him to ask; for it contains all the information which our Creator sees it best that His human creatures should, at present, possess.
II. Their surpassing value.
1. In possessing the Scriptures we possess every real advantage that would result from the establishment of an oracle among us; and more. For wherever the oracle might be placed, it would unavoidably be at a distance from a large proportion of those who wished for its advice. But in the Scriptures we possess an oracle, which may be brought home to every family and every individual at all times.
2. But in consequence of having been familiar with them from our childhood, we are far from being sensible how deeply we are indebted to them. We must place ourselves in the situation of a serious inquirer after truth, who has pursued his inquiries as far as unassisted intellect can go; and that he now finds himself bewildered in a maze of conflicting theories into which the researches of men unenlightened by revelation inevitably plunge them. To such a man what would the Scripture be worth? He asks, Who made the universe? A mild, but majestic voice replies from the oracle, In the beginning, God created the heavens, and the earth. Startled, the inquirer eagerly exclaims, Who is God–what is His nature? God, replies the voice, is a spirit, wise, almighty, holy, just, merciful and gracious, long suffering, etc. The inquirers mind labours, faints, while vainly attempting to grasp the Being, now, for the first time disclosed. But a new and more powerful motive now stimulates his inquiries, and he asks, Does any relation subsist between this God and myself? He is thy Maker, Father, Preserver, Sovereign, Judge; in Him thou dost live, and move, and exist; and at death thy spirit will return to God who gave it. How, resumes the inquirer, will He then receive me? He will reward thee according to thy works. What works? Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, with all thy heart, etc. Every transgression of this law is a sin; and the soul that sinneth shall die. Have I sinned? the inquirer tremblingly asks. All, replies the oracle, have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. A new sensation of conscious guilt now oppresses the inquirer, and with increased anxiety he asks, Is there any way in which the pardon of sin may be obtained? The blood of Jesus Christ, replies the oracle, cleanseth from all sin. He that confesseth and forsaketh his sins shall find mercy. But to whom shall I confess them? where find the God whom I have offended? He is a God at hand, returns the voice; I, who speak to thee, am He. God be merciful to me a sinner, exclaims the inquirer, not daring to lift his eyes towards the oracle: What, Lord, wilt Thou have me to do? Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, answers the voice, and thou shalt be saved. Lord, who is Jesus Christ? that I may believe on Him? He is My Beloved Son, whom I have set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood; hear thou Him, for there is salvation in no other. Such are, probably, some of the questions which would be asked by the supposed inquirer; and such are, in substance, the answers which he would receive from the oracles of God. Who can compute the value of these answers.
III. Their inexhaustibleness. But why should those consult them who are already acquainted with the answers which they will return?
1. Has the man who asks this drawn from the Scriptures all the information which they contain? It may reasonably be doubted whether anyone would have discovered that the declaration of Jehovah, I am the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, furnishes a conclusive proof of the after existence of the human soul. And how many times might we have read the declaration, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec, before we should have suspected that it involves all those important consequences deduced from it in the Epistle to the Hebrews? And many other passages remain to reward the researches of future inquirers.
2. Many of the oracles contain an infinity of meaning which no mind can ever exhaust. What finite mind will fully comprehend all that is contained in the titles given to Jehovah and Christ, or in the words, eternity, heaven; hell? Now he who most frequently consults the oracles will penetrate most deeply into their unfathomable abyss of meaning. He may, indeed, receive the same answers to his inquiries; but these answers will convey to his mind clearer and more enlarged conceptions of the truths which they reveal. His views will resemble those of an astronomer, who is, from time to time, furnished with telescopes of greater power; or what at first seemed only an indistinct shadow, will become a vivid picture, and the picture will, at length, stand out in bold relief. The lisping child and the astronomer use the word sun to denote the same object. The child, however, means by this word, nothing more than a round, luminous body, of a few inches in diameter. But it would require a volume to contain all the conceptions of which this word stands for the sign in the mind of the astronomer.
IV. Their vitalising power. It may, perhaps, be objected that, as the Scriptures do not speak in an audible voice, their answers can never possess that life which attends the responses of a living oracle, such as was formerly established among the Jews. On the contrary, they are well termed lively or living oracles–alive and powerful. The words, says Christ, that I speak unto you, are spirit, and they are life. The living God lives in them, and employs their instrumentality in imparting life. Take away His accompanying influences, and the living oracles become a dead letter. But he who consults them aright does not find them a dead letter; he finds that the living, life-giving Spirit, by whom they were and are inspired, carries home their words to him with an energy which no tongue can express.
V. The manner in which they are to be consulted. Thousands, of course, derive no benefit, and receive no satisfactory answers, for they do not consult them, as an oracle of God ever ought to be consulted.
1. They do not consult them with becoming reverence. They peruse them with little more reverence than the works of a human author, as they would consult a dictionary or an almanac.
2. Nor is sincerity less necessary than reverence–a real desire to know our duty, with a full determination to believe and obey the answers we shall receive. If we consult the oracles of God with a view to gratify our sinful inclinations, or to justify our questionable pursuits, practices, or favourite prejudices, the oracle will be dumb. The same remark is applicable to everyone who consults the Scriptures, while he neglects known duties, or disobeys known commands. We may see these remarks exemplified in Saul. He had been guilty of known disobedience; and therefore, when he inquired of the Lord, the Lord answer him not.
3. There are others whose want of success is owing to their unbelief. As no food can nourish those who do not partake of it; as no medicines can prove salutary to those who refuse to make use of them; so no oracles can be serviceable to those by whom they are not believed with a cordial, practical, operative faith. The Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation only through faith in Christ Jesus.
4. Many persons derive no benefit from the oracles of God, because they attempt to consult them without prayer. Consulting an oracle is an act which, in its very nature, implies an acknowledgment of ignorance, and a petition for guidance, for instruction. He, then, who reads the Scriptures without prayer, does not really consult them. (E. Payson, D. D.)
The oracles of God: accessible to all
A priest observing to William Tyndale, We are better without Gods laws than the Popes, I defy the Pope and all his laws, he replied; and added, If God spare my life, ere many years I will cause the boy which driveth the plough to know more of Scripture than you do. (Quarterly Review.)
The oracles of God: accessible to all
A Roman Catholic priest in Ireland recently discovered a peasant reading the Bible, and reproved him for daring to peruse a book forbidden to the laity. The peasant proceeded to justify himself by a reference to the contents of the book, and the holy doctrines which it taught. The priest replied, that the doctrines could only be understood by the learned, and that ignorant men would wrest them to their own destruction. But, said the peasant, I am authorised, your reverence, to read the Bible; I have a search warrant. What do you mean, sir? said the priest, in anger. Why, replied the peasant, Jesus Christ says, Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me. The argument was unanswerable.
The oracles of God: how to consult
How am I to know the Word of God? By studying it with the help of the Holy Ghost. As an American bishop said, Not with the blue light of Presbyterianism, nor the red light of Methodism, nor the violet light of Episcopacy, but with the clear light of Calvary. We must study it on our knees, in a teachable spirit. If we know our Bible Satan will not have much power over us, and we will have the world under our feet. (D. L. Moody.)
The oracles of God: may be consulted with perfect confidence
If a man in the night, by the light of a lamp, is trying to make out his chart, and there is storm in the heavens and storm upon the sea, and someone knocks that lamp out of his hand, what is done? The storm is above and the storm is below, and the chart lies dark, so that he cannot find it out–that is all. If it were daylight he could see the chart well enough; but there being no light, and the lamp on which he depended for light being knocked out of his hand, he cannot avail himself of that which is before him. And the same is true concerning much of the Bible. It is an interpreter. It is a lamp to our feet and a light to our path. And those truths which have their exposition in the Bible, and which are a revelation of the structure of the world and of the Divine nature and government, do not depend for their truth upon the Bible itself. They are only interpreted and made plain by it. (H. W. Beecher.)
The oracles of God: never consulted in vain
How marvellous is the adaptation of Scripture for the race for whom it was revealed! In its pages every conceivable condition of human experience is reflected as in a mirror. In its words every struggle of the heart can find appropriate and forceful expression. It is absolutely inexhaustible in its resources for the conveyance of the deepest feelings of the soul. It puts music into the speech of the tuneless one, and rounds the periods of the unlettered into an eloquence which no orator can rival. It has martial odes to brace the warriors courage, and gainful proverbs to teach the merchant wisdom; all mental moods can represent themselves in its amplitude of words. It can translate the doubt of the perplexed; it can articulate the cry of the contrite; it fills the tongue of the joyous with carols of thankful gladness; and it gives sorrow words, lest grief, that does not speak, should whisper to the heart, and bid it break. Happy we, who, in all the varieties of our religious life, have this copious manual Divinely provided to our hand. (W. M. Punshon.)
The oracles of God: suppose they should be taken away
I thought I was at home, and that, on taking up my Bible one morning, I found, to my surprise, what seemed to be the old familiar book was a total blank; not a character was inscribed in or upon it. On going into the street I found everyone complaining in similar perplexity of the same loss; and before night it became evident that a great and wonderful miracle had been wrought in the world; the Hand which had written its awful menace on the walls of Belshazzars palace had reversed the miracle, and expunged from our Bibles every syllable they contained–thus reclaiming the most precious gift Heaven had bestowed and ungrateful man had abused. I was curious to watch the effects of this calamity on the varied characters of mankind. There was, however, universally an interest in the Bible, now it was lost, such as had never attached to it while it was possessed. Some to whom the sacred book had been a blank for twenty years, and who never would have known of their loss but for the lamentations of their neighbours, were not the less vehement in their expressions of sorrow. The calamity not only stirred the feelings of men, but it immediately stimulated their ingenuity to repair their loss. It was very early suggested that the whole Bible had again and again been quoted piecemeal in one book or another; that it had impressed its image on human literature, and had been reflected on its surface as the stars on a stream. But, alas! on inspection it was found that every text, every phrase which had been quoted, whether in books of theology, poetry, or fiction, had been remorselessly obliterated. It was with trembling hand that some made the attempt to transcribe the erased texts from memory. They feared that the writing would surely fade away; but, to their unspeakable joy, they found the impression durable; and people at length came to the conclusion that God left them at liberty, if they could, to reconstruct the Bible for themselves, out of their collective remembrances of its contents. Some obscure individuals who had studied nothing else but the Bible, but who had well studied that, came to be the objects of reverence among Christians and booksellers; but he who could fill up a chasm by the restoration of words which were only partially remembered was regarded as a public benefactor. At length a great movement was projected amongst the divines of all denominations to collate the results of these partial recoveries of the sacred text. But here it was curious to see the variety of different readings of the same passages insisted on by conflicting theologians. No doubt the worthy men were generally unconscious of the influence of prejudice; yet somehow the memory was seldom so clear in relation to texts which told against as in relation to those which told for their several theories. It was curious, too, to see by what odd associations of contrast, or sometimes of resemblance, obscure texts were recovered. A miser contributed a maxim of prudence which he recollected principally from having systematically abused. All the ethical maxims were soon collected; for though, as usual, no one recollected his own peculiar duties or infirmities, everyone kindly remembered those of his neighbours. As for Solomons times for everything. few could recall the whole, but everybody remembered some. Undertakers said there was a time to mourn, and comedians said there was a time to laugh; young ladies innumerable remembered there was a time to love, and people of all kinds that there was a time to hate; everybody knew that there was a time to speak, but a worthy Quaker added that there was also a time to keep silence. But the most amusing thing of all was to see the variety of speculations which were entertained concerning the object and design of this strange event. Many gravely questioned whether it could be right to attempt the reconstruction of a book of which God Himself had so manifestly deprived the world; and some, who were secretly glad to be relieved of so troublesome a monitor, were particularly pious on this head, and exclaimed bitterly against this rash attempt to counteract the decrees of Heaven. Some even maintained that the visitation was not in judgment but in mercy; that God in compassion, and not in indignation, had taken away a book which men had regarded with an extravagant admiration and idolatry; and that, if a rebuke at all was intended, it was a rebuke to a rampant Bibliolatry. This last reason, which assigned as the cause of Gods resumption of His own gift an extravagant admiration and reverence of it on the part of mankind–it being so notorious that even the best of those who professed belief in its Divine origin and authority had so grievously neglected it–struck me as so ludicrous that I broke into a fit of laughter, which awoke me. The morning sun was streaming in at the window and shining upon the open Bible which lay on the table; and it was with joy that my eyes rested upon those words, which I read with grateful tears–The gifts of God are without repentance. (H. Rogers.)
The Bible
I. Its possession is an immense advantage to any people. What distinguishes it from all other books, and gives it transcendent worth, is that it contains the oracles of God.
1. They are infinitely valuable in themselves. They are infallible truth. The oracles of the heathen world were gross deceptions, that of Apollo at Delphi was a notorious imposture. They give–
(1) A true revelation of God to man.
(2) A true revelation of man to himself. Who can estimate the transcendent worth of such revelations?
2. They are infinitely valuable in their influence.
(1) Intellectually. They quicken reason and set the wheels of thought ageing.
(2) Socially. They unseal the fountains of social sympathy, and bless the people with philanthropic societies and institutions.
(3) Politically. They break down tyrannies, promote wholesome laws, and foster fair dealing, peace, and liberty.
(4) Spiritually. Their great work is to generate, develope, and perfect the highest spiritual life.
II. There are those who lack true faith in it. What if some did not believe? Though the Jews, as a people, had the oracles, there were multitudes amongst them who were destitute of faith. Their conduct during their pilgrimage, their whole history in Canaan, and the rejection of the true Messiah, all proved they had little or no faith in the oracles they possessed. How few, today, who possess the Bible have any true faith in the Divine oracles. To such the Bible–
1. Is of no real spiritual advantage. It can convey no real benefit to the soul, only so far as its truths are believed and realised. Unless it is believed it has no more power to help the soul, the man, than the genial sunbeam or the fertilising shower to help the tree that is rotten at its roots.
2. It ultimately becomes a curse. It heightens responsibility and augments guilt. If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not known sin.
III. The lack of faith is it neither affects its reality nor lessens its importance (verse 3). Mans lack of faith will neither affect nor nullify the faithfulness of God. Facts are independent of denials or affirmations. What if some say there is no God? Their denial does not destroy the fact, He still exists. What if some say there is no hell; hell still burns on. Though all Europe denied that the earth moved, it still pursued its course circling round the sun. But though our states of mind, whether credulous or incredulous, in no way affect those facts, they vitally affect our own character and destiny. What if we do not believe? It matters nothing to the universe or to God, but it matters much, nay everything to us. (D. Thomas, D. D.)
The Bible given for guidance
Here is a man going over a mountain. Night falls and he is lost. He sees a light in a cabin window. He hastens up to it. The mountaineer comes out and says, I will furnish you with a lantern. The man does not say, I dont like the handle, and I dont like the shape of this lantern; it is octangular; it ought to be round; if you cant give me a better one, I wont take any. Oh, no. He starts on with it. He wants to get home. That lantern shines on the path all the way through the mountain. Now, what is the Bible? Have we any right to say we do not like this or that in it, when God intended it for a lamp for our feet and a lantern for our path to guide us through our wilderness march, and bring us at last to our Fathers house on high? (T. De Witt Talmage.)
The use of the Bible
The Rev. E.T. Taylor, commonly known as Father Taylor, addressing a number of sailors, said, I say, shipmates, now look me full in the face. What should we say of the man aboard ship who was always talking about his compass, and never using it? What should you think of the man who, when the storm is gathering, night at hand, moon and stars shut, on a lee shore, breakers ahead, then first begins to remember his compass, and says, Oh, what a nice compass I have got on board, if before that time he has never looked at it? Where is it that you keep your compass? Do you stow it away in the hold? Do you clap it into the forepeak? By this time Jacks face, that unerring index of the soul, showed visibly that the reductio ad absurdum had begun to tell. Then came, by a natural logic, as correct as that of the school, the improvement. Now, then, brethren, listen to me. Believe not what the scoffer and the infidel say. The Bible, the Bible is the compass of life. Keep it always at hand. Steadily, steadily fix your eye on it. Study your bearing by it. Make yourself acquainted with all its points. It will serve you in calm and in storm, in the brightness of noonday, and amid the blackness of night; it will carry you over every sea, in every clime, and navigate you, at last, into the harbour of eternal rest.
The Bible a national advantage
Father Hyacinths, an eloquent and fearless priest in Paris, while recently preaching a charity sermon in Lyons, in behalf of the asylum for the poor, having asked his audience, which was composed of the principal Roman Catholic families, if they knew why Prussia triumphed on the field of battle in the war with Austria, said, It is because the nation is more enlightened, more religious, and because every Prussian soldier has the Bible in his knapsack. I will add, that what produces the power and superiority of Protestant peoples is, that they possess and read the Bible at their own firesides. I have been twice in England, and have learned that the Bible is the strength of that nation.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER III.
The apostle points out the peculiar privileges of the Jews,
1-8.
But shows that they, also, as well as the Gentiles, had sinned,
and forfeited all right and title to God’s especial favour, 9.
The corrupt state of all mankind, 10-18.
All the world is guilty before God, and none can be justified by
the works of the law, 19, 20.
God’s MERCY in providing redemption for a lost world, by Jesus
Christ, 21-26.
This excludes boasting on the part both of Jew and Gentile;
provides salvation through faith for both; and does not set
aside, but establishes the law, 27-31.
NOTES ON CHAP. III.
Dr. Taylor observes:- “In the preceding chapter the apostle has carried his argument to the utmost length: what remains is to keep the Jew in temper, to fix his convictions, and to draw the grand conclusion.
“He has shown that the Jews were more wicked than the Gentiles; that their possession of the law, circumcision, and outward profession of relation to God, were no ground of acceptance with him. This was in effect to say that the Jews had forfeited their right to the privileges of God’s peculiar people, and that they were as unworthy to be continued in the Church as the Gentiles were to be taken into it; and consequently, in order to their enjoying the privileges of the Church under the Messiah, they stood in need of a fresh display of grace, which if they rejected, God would cast them out of the vineyard. The apostle was sensible that the Jew would understand what he said in this sense; and that it must be very irritating to him to hear that his law, circumcision, and all his external advantages, were utterly insufficient to procure him the favour of God. This at once stripped him of all his peculiar honours and privileges; and the apostle, who had often argued with his countrymen on these points, knew what they would be ready to say on this subject; and, therefore, introduces a dialogue between himself and a Jew, in which he gives him leave to answer and defend himself. In this dialogue the apostle undoubtedly refers to the rejection of the Jews, which he considers at large in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters. After the dialogue is finished, he resumes his argument, and proves, by their own Scriptures, that the Jews were guilty as well as other men; and that no part of mankind could have any right to the blessings of God’s kingdom by any works which they had performed, but merely through the propitiatory sacrifice offered by Christ; and that this, far from destroying the law, was just the thing that the law required, and by which its claims were established.
“The sum and force of the apostle’s argument is this: All sorts of men, Jews as well as Gentiles, have sinned; therefore, none of them can lay claim to the blessings of his kingdom on the ground of obedience. The Jew, therefore, stands as much in need of God’s grace to give him a title to those blessings as the Gentile; and, consequently, the Gentile has as good a title as the Jew. And, when all are in the same circumstances, it is perfectly absurd for any to pretend to engross it to themselves, exclusively of others, who are only as bad as they.
“Thus the apostle solidly proves that we, Gentiles, through faith alone, have a good and firm title to all the blessings of the Gospel covenant-election, adoption, pardon, privileges, ordinances, the Holy Spirit, and the hope of eternal life.”
As the nine first verses are a dialogue between the apostle and a Jew, I shall prefix the speakers to their respective questions and answers, to make the whole the more intelligible to the reader.
Verse 1. JEW. What advantage then hath the Jew? Or what profit is there of circumcision?] As if he had said: You lately allowed, (Ro 2:25,) that circumcision verily profited; but if circumcision, or our being in covenant with God, raises us no higher in the Divine favour than the Gentiles; if the virtuous among them are as acceptable as any of us; nay, and condemn our nation too, as no longer deserving the Divine regards; pray tell me, wherein lies the superior honour of the Jew; and what benefit can arise to him from his circumcision, and being vested in the privileges of God’s peculiar people?
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
What advantage then hath the Jew? An elegant prolepsis or anticipation of what might be objected against the apostles assertion in the foregoing words. If the Jews (might some object) lie equally exposed to condemnation with the Gentiles, then they have no excellency above them. Or thus, If external things do not commend us to God, (as it is affirmed, Rom 2:28,29), but the Gentiles are brought into the church without them, then the Jews have no prerogative above the Gentiles, though God hath owned them so long for his peculiar people.
What profit is there of circumcision? i.e. what is the use of it, or for what end was it instituted, seeing the uncircumcised are brought in and accepted, as being circumcised notwithstanding, and clean in heart?
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
1, 2. What advantage then hath theJew?that is, “If the final judgment will turn solely onthe state of the heart, and this may be as good in the Gentilewithout, as in the Jew within, the sacred enclosure ofGod’s covenant, what better are we Jews for all our advantages?”
Answer:
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
What advantage then hath the Jew?…. If he is not properly a Jew, who is born of Jewish parents, and brought up in the customs, rites, and religion of the Jewish nation, but anyone of whatsoever nation, that is born again of water, and of the Spirit; where is the superior excellency of the Jew to the Gentile? A man may as well be born and brought up a Heathen as a Jew; the one has no more advantages than the other by his birth and education: it may be rendered, “what hath the Jew more?” or “what has he superfluous” or “abundant?” the phrase answers to the Hebrew in Ec 1:3, which is rendered, “what profit hath a man?” and in Ec 6:8, , “what hath a wise man more”, c. and in Ro 3:11, , “what is a man better?” the first of these passages the Septuagint render by , “what abundance?” and the last by
, “what more”, or “superfluous”, or “abundant?” the phrase used by the apostle here:
or what profit is there of circumcision? since that which is outward in the flesh profits not unless the law is kept, otherwise circumcision is no circumcision and if an uncircumcised Gentile keeps the law, he is a better man than a circumcised Jew; yea, he judges and condemns him; for the only true circumcision is internal, spiritual, and in the heart. To this the apostle answers in the Ro 3:2.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| The Advantages of the Jews; Objections Answered; The Depravity of Jews and Gentiles. | A. D. 58. |
1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? 2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. 3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? 4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. 5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man) 6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world? 7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? 8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just. 9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; 10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: 11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. 12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. 13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: 14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: 15 Their feet are swift to shed blood: 16 Destruction and misery are in their ways: 17 And the way of peace have they not known: 18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.
I. Here the apostle answers several objections, which might be made, to clear his way. No truth so plain and evident but wicked wits and corrupt carnal hearts will have something to say against it; but divine truths must be cleared from cavil.
Object. 1. If Jew and Gentile stand so much upon the same level before God, what advantage then hath the Jew? Hath not God often spoken with a great deal of respect for the Jews, as a non-such people (Deut. xxxiii. 29), a holy nation, a peculiar treasure, the seed of Abraham his friend: Did not he institute circumcision as a badge of their church-membership, and a seal of their covenant-relation to God? Now does not this levelling doctrine deny them all such prerogatives, and reflect dishonour upon the ordinance of circumcision, as a fruitless insignificant thing.
Answer. The Jews are, notwithstanding this, a people greatly privileged and honoured, have great means and helps, though these be not infallibly saving (v. 2): Much every way. The door is open to the Gentiles as well as the Jews, but the Jews have a fairer way up to this door, by reason of their church-privileges, which are not to be undervalued, though many that have them perish eternally for not improving them. He reckons up many of the Jews’ privileges Rom 9:4; Rom 9:5; here he mentions but one (which is indeed instar omnium—equivalent to all), that unto them were committed the oracles of God, that is, the scriptures of the Old Testament, especially the law of Moses, which is called the lively oracles (Acts vii. 38), and those types, promises, and prophecies, which relate to Christ and the gospel. The scriptures are the oracles of God: they are a divine revelation, they come from heaven, are of infallible truth, and of eternal consequence as oracles. The Septuagint call the Urim and Thummim the logia—the oracles. The scripture is our breast-plate of judgment. We must have recourse to the law and to the testimony, as to an oracle. The gospel is called the oracles of God, Heb 5:12; 1Pe 4:11. Now these oracles were committed to the Jews; the Old Testament was written in their language; Moses and the prophets were of their nation, lived among them, preached and wrote primarily to and for the Jews. They were committed to them as trustees for succeeding ages and churches. The Old Testament was deposited in their hands, to be carefully preserved pure and uncorrupt, and so transmitted down to posterity. The Jews were the Christians’ library-keepers, were entrusted with that sacred treasure for their own use and benefit in the first place, and then for the advantage of the world; and, in preserving the letter of the scripture, they were very faithful to their trust, did not lose one iota or tittle, in which we are to acknowledge God’s gracious care and providence. The Jews had the means of salvation, but they had not the monopoly of salvation. Now this he mentions with a chiefly, proton men gar–this was their prime and principal privilege. The enjoyment of God’s word and ordinances is the chief happiness of a people, is to be put in the imprimis of their advantages, Deu 4:8; Deu 33:3; Psa 147:20.
Object. 2. Against what he had said of the advantages the Jews had in the lively oracles, some might object the unbelief of many of them. To what purpose were the oracles of God committed to them, when so many of them, notwithstanding these oracles, continued strangers to Christ, and enemies to his gospel? Some did not believe, v. 3.
Answer. It is very true that some, nay most of the present Jews, do not believe in Christ; but shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? The apostle startles at such a thought: God forbid! The infidelity and obstinacy of the Jews could not invalidate and overthrow those prophecies of the Messiah which were contained in the oracles committed to them. Christ will be glorious, though Israel be not gathered, Isa. xlix. 5. God’s words shall be accomplished, his purposes performed, and all his ends answered, though there be a generation that by their unbelief go about to make God a liar. Let God be true but every man a liar; let us abide by this principle, that God is true to every word which he has spoken, and will let none of his oracles fall to the ground, though thereby we give the lie to man; better question and overthrow the credit of all the men in the world than doubt of the faithfulness of God. What David said in his haste (Ps. cxvi. 11), that all men are liars, Paul here asserts deliberately. Lying is a limb of that old man which we every one of us come into the world clothed with. All men are fickle, and mutable, and given to change, vanity and a lie (Ps. lxii. 9), altogether vanity, Ps. xxxix. 5. All men are liars, compared with God. It is very comfortable, when we find every man a liar (no faith in man), that God is faithful. When they speak vanity every one with his neighbour, it is very comfortable to think that the words of the Lord are pure words,Psa 12:2; Psa 12:6. For the further proof of this he quotes Ps. li. 4, That thou mightest be justified, the design of which is to show, 1. That God does and will preserve his own honour in the world, notwithstanding the sins of men. 2. That it is our duty, in all our conclusions concerning ourselves and others, to justify God and to assert and maintain his justice, truth, and goodness, however it goes. David lays a load upon himself in his confession, that he might justify God, and acquit him from any injustice. So here, Let the credit or reputation of man shift for itself, the matter is not great whether it sink or swim; let us hold fast this conclusion, how specious soever the premises may be to the contrary, that the Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works. Thus is God justified in his sayings, and cleared when he judges (as it is Ps. li. 4), or when he is judged, as it is here rendered. When men presume to quarrel with God and his proceedings, we may be sure the sentence will go on God’s side.
Object. 3. Carnal hearts might hence take occasion to encourage themselves in sin. He had said that the universal guilt and corruption of mankind gave occasion to the manifestation of God’s righteousness in Jesus Christ. Now it may be suggested, If all our sin be so far from overthrowing God’s honour that it commends it, and his ends are secured, so that there is no harm done, is it not unjust for God to punish our sin and unbelief so severely? If the unrighteousness of the Jews gave occasion to the calling in of the Gentiles, and so to God’s greater glory, why are the Jews so much censured? If our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? v. 5. What inference may be drawn from this? Is God unrighteous, me adikos ho Theos—Is not God unrighteous (so it may be read, more in the form of an objection), who taketh vengeance? Unbelieving hearts will gladly take any occasion to quarrel with equity of God’s proceedings, and to condemn him that is most just, Job xxxiv. 17. I speak as a man, that is, I object this as the of carnal hearts; it is suggested like a man, a vain, foolish, proud creature.
Answer. God forbid; far be it from us to imagine such a thing. Suggestions that reflect dishonour upon God and his justice and holiness are rather to be startled at than parleyed with. Get thee behind me, Satan; never entertain such a thought. For then how shall God judge the world? v. 6. The argument is much the same with that of Abraham (Gen. xviii. 25): Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? No doubt, he shall. If he were not infinitely just and righteous, he would be unfit to be the judge of all the earth. Shall even he that hateth right govern? Job xxxiv. 17. Compare Rom 3:18; Rom 3:19. The sin has never the less of malignity and demerit in it though God bring glory to himself out of it. It is only accidentally that sin commends God’s righteousness. No thanks to the sinner for that, who intends no such thing. The consideration of God’s judging the world should for ever silence all our doubtings of, and reflections upon, his justice and equity. It is not for us to arraign the proceedings of such an absolute Sovereign. The sentence of the supreme court, whence lies no appeal, is not to be called in question.
Object. 4. The former objection is repeated and prosecuted (Rom 3:7; Rom 3:8), for proud hearts will hardly be beaten out of their refuge of lies, but will hold fast the deceit. But his setting off the objection in its own colours is sufficient to answer it: If the truth of God has more abounded through my lie. He supposes the sophisters to follow their objection thus: “If my lie, that is, my sin” (for there is something of a lie in every sin, especially in the sins of professors) “have occasioned the glorifying of God’s truth and faithfulness, why should I be judged and condemned as a sinner, and not rather thence take encouragement to go on in my sin, that grace may abound?” an inference which at first sight appears too black to be argued, and fit to be cast out with abhorrence. Daring sinners take occasion to boast in mischief, because the goodness of God endures continually, Ps. lii. 1. Let us do evil that good may come is oftener in the heart than in the mouth of sinners, so justifying themselves in their wicked ways. Mentioning this wicked thought, he observes, in a parenthesis, that there were those who charged such doctrines as this upon Paul and his fellow-ministers: Some affirm that we say so. It is no new thing for the best of God’s people and ministers to be charged with holding and teaching such things as they do most detest and abhor; and it is not to be thought strange, when our Master himself was said to be in league with Beelzebub. Many have been reproached as if they had said that the contrary of which they maintain: it is an old artifice of Satan thus to cast dirt upon Christ’s ministers, Fortiter calumniari, aliquid adhrebit–Lay slander thickly on, for some will be sure to stick. The best men and the best truths are subject to slander. Bishop Sanderson makes a further remark upon this, as we are slanderously reported—blasphemoumetha. Blasphemy in scripture usually signifies the highest degree of slander, speaking ill of God. The slander of a minister and his regular doctrine is a more than ordinary slander, it is a kind of blasphemy, not for his person’s sake, but for his calling’s sake and his work’s sake, 1 Thess. v. 13.
Answer. He says no more by way of confutation but that, whatever they themselves may argue, the damnation of those is just. Some understand it of the slanderers; God will justly condemn those who unjustly condemn his truth. Or, rather, it is to be applied to those who embolden themselves in sin under a pretence of God’s getting glory to himself out of it. Those who deliberately do evil that good may come of it will be so far from escaping, under the shelter of that excuse, that it will rather justify their damnation, and render them the more inexcusable; for sinning upon such a surmise, and in such a confidence, argues a great deal both of the wit and of the will in the sin–a wicked will deliberately to choose the evil, and a wicked wit to palliate it with the pretence of good arising from it. Therefore their damnation is just; and, whatever excuses of this kind they may now please themselves with, they will none of them stand good in the great day, but God will be justified in his proceedings, and all flesh, even the proud flesh that now lifts up itself against him, shall be silent before him. Some think Paul herein refers to the approaching ruin of the Jewish church and nation, which their obstinacy and self-justification in their unbelief hastened upon them apace.
II. Paul, having removed these objections, next revives his assertion of the general guilt and corruption of mankind in common, both of Jews and Gentiles, v. 9-18. “Are we better than they, we Jews, to whom were committed the oracles of God? Does this recommend us to God, or will this justify us? No, by no means.” Or, “Are we Christians (Jews and Gentiles) so much better antecedently than the unbelieving part as to have merited God’s grace? Alas! no: before free grace made the difference, those of us that had been Jews and those that had been Gentiles were all alike corrupted.” They are all under sin. Under the guilt of sin: under it as under a sentence;–under it as under a bond, by which they are bound over to eternal ruin and damnation;–under it as under a burden (Ps. xxxviii. 4) that will sink them to the lowest hell: we are guilty before God, v. 19. Under the government and dominion of sin: under it as under a tyrant and cruel task-master, enslaved to it;–under it as under a yoke;–under the power of it, sold to work wickedness. And this he had proved, proetiasametha. It is a law term: We have charged them with it, and have made good our charge; we have proved the indictment, we have convicted them by the notorious evidence of the fact. This charge and conviction he here further illustrates by several scriptures out of the Old Testament, which describe the corrupt depraved state of all men, till grave restrain or change them; so that herein as in a glass we may all of us behold our natural face. The Rom 3:10-12; Psa 14:1-3 are taken from Rom 3:10-12; Psa 14:1-3, which are repeated as containing a very weighty truth, Psa 53:1-3; Psa 14:1-3. The rest that follows here is found in the Septuagint translation of the 14th Psalm, which some think the apostle chooses to follow as better known; but I rather think that Paul took these passages from other places of scripture here referred to, but in later copies of the LXX. they were all added in Ps. xiv. from this discourse of Paul. It is observable that, to prove the general corruption of nature, he quotes some scriptures which speak of the particular corruptions of particular persons, as of Doeg (Ps. cxl. 3), of the Jews (Isa 59:7; Isa 59:8), which shows that the same sins that are committed by one are in the nature of all. The times of David and Isaiah were some of the better times, and yet to their days he refers. What is said Ps. xiv. is expressly spoken of all the children of men, and that upon a particular view and inspection made by God himself. The Lord looked down, as upon the old world, Gen. vi. 5. And this judgment of God was according to truth. He who, when he himself had made all, looked upon every thing that he had made, and behold all was very good, now that man had marred all, looked, and behold all was very bad. Let us take a view of the particulars. Observe,
1. That which is habitual, which is two-fold:–
(1.) An habitual defect of every thing that is good. [1.] There is none righteous, none that has an honest good principle of virtue, or is governed by such a principle, none that retains any thing of that image of God, consisting in righteousness, wherein man was created; no, not one; implying that, if there had been but one, God would have found him out. When all the world was corrupt, God had his eye upon one righteous Noah. Even those who through grace are justified and sanctified were none of them righteous by nature. No righteousness is born with us. The man after God’s own heart owns himself conceived in sin. [2.] There is none that understandeth, v. 11. The fault lies in the corruption of the understanding; that is blinded, depraved, perverted. Religion and righteousness have so much reason on their side that if people had but any understanding they would be better and do better. But they do not understand. Sinners are fools. [3.] None that seeketh after God, that is,none that has any regard to God, any desire after him. Those may justly be reckoned to have no understanding that do not seek after God. The carnal mind is so far from seeking after God that really it is enmity against him. [4.] They are together become unprofitable, v. 12. Those that have forsaken God soon grow good for nothing, useless burdens of the earth. Those that are in a state of sin are the most unprofitable creatures under the sun; for it follows, [5.] There is none that doeth good; no, not a just man upon the earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not, Eccl. vii. 23. Even in those actions of sinners that have some goodness in them there is a fundamental error in the principle and end; so that it may be said, There is none that doeth good. Malum oritur ex quolibet defectu–Every defect is the source of evil.
(2.) An habitual defection to every thing that is evil: They are all gone out of the way. No wonder that those miss the right way who do not seek after God, the highest end. God made man in the way, set him in right, but he hath forsaken it. The corruption of mankind is an apostasy.
2. That which is actual. And what good can be expected from such a degenerate race? He instances,
(1.) In their words (Rom 3:13; Rom 3:14), in three things particularly:– [1.] Cruelty: Their throat is an open sepulchre, ready to swallow up the poor and innocent, waiting an opportunity to do mischief, like the old serpent seeking to devour, whose name is Abaddon and Apollyon, the destroyer. And when they do not openly avow this cruelty, and vent it publicly, yet they are underhand intending mischief: the poison of asps is under their lips (Jam. iii. 8), the most venomous and incurable poison, with which they blast the good name of their neighbour by reproaches, and aim at his life by false witness. These passages are borrowed from Psa 5:9; Psa 140:3. [2.] Cheating: With their tongues they have used deceit. Herein they show themselves the devil’s children, for he is a liar, and the father of lies. They have used it: it intimates that they make a trade of lying; it is their constant practice, especially belying the ways and people of God. [3.] Cursing: reflecting upon God, and blaspheming his holy name; wishing evil to their brethren: Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. This is mentioned as one of the great sins of the tongue, Jam. iii. 9. But those that thus love cursing shall have enough of it, Ps. cix. 17-19. How many, who are called Christians, do by these sin evince that they are still under the reign and dominion of sin, still in the condition that they were born in.
(2.) In their ways (v. 15-17): Their feet are swift to shed blood; that is, they are very industrious to compass any cruel design, ready to lay hold of all such opportunities. Wherever they go, destruction and misery go along with them; these are their companions–destruction and misery to the people of God, to the country and neighbourhood where they live, to the land and nation, and to themselves at last. Besides the destruction and misery that are at the end of their ways (death is the end of these things), destruction and misery are in their ways; their sin is its own punishment: a man needs no more to make him miserable than to be a slave to his sins.–And the way of peace have they not known; that is, they know not how to preserve peace with others, nor how to obtain peace for themselves. They may talk of peace, such a peace as is in the devil’s palace, while he keeps it, but they are strangers to all true peace; they know not the things that belong to their peace. These are quoted from Pro 1:16; Isa 59:7; Isa 59:8.
(3.) The root of all this we have: There is no fear of God before their eyes, v. 18. The fear of God is here put for all practical religion, which consists in an awful and serious regard to the word and will of God as our rule, to the honour and glory of God as our end. Wicked people have not this before their eyes; that is, they do not steer by it; they are governed by other rules, aim at other ends. This is quoted from Ps. xxxvi. 1. Where no fear of God is, no good is to be expected. The fear of God is would lay a restraint upon our spirits, and keep them right, Neh. v. 15. When once fear is cast off, prayer is restrained (Job xv. 4), and then all goes to wreck and ruin quickly. So that we have here a short account of the general depravity and corruption of mankind; and may say, O Adam! what hast thou done? God made man upright, but thus he hath sought out many inventions.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
What advantage then hath the Jew? ( ?). Literally, “What then is the overplus of the Jew?” What does the Jew have over and above the Gentile? It is a pertinent question after the stinging indictment of the Jew in chapter 2.
The profit ( ). The help. Old word, only here in N.T. See Mr 8:36 for , the verb to profit.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Advantage [] . Lit., surplus. Hence prerogative or pre – eminence.
Profit [] . Compare profiteth, Rom 2:25.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
JEW ADVANTAGE-GREATER CONDEMNATION
1) “What advantage then hath the Jew?” (ti oun to perisson tou loudaiou) “What therefore advantage have the Jews,” above or over the Gentiles? Rom 9:4-5; Their chief advantage was that they were depositories of or entrusted with a direct revelation of God’s will thru the law and the prophets in what might be termed a “first-hand” way, or directly from God, Joh 1:11-12; Rom 1:16; Rom 10:12-13.
2) “Or what profit is there of circumcision?” (e tis he opheleia tes peritomes;) “Or what profit exists of or from circumcision?” What good does it do him? It gave him a National identity with the chosen people of God who was entrusted with the Law, till the Messiah should come, Rom 2:25; Gal 3:19; Gal 3:24-25.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
1. Though Paul has clearly proved that bare circumcision brought nothing to the Jews, yet since he could not deny but that there was some difference between the Gentiles and the Jews, which by that symbol was sealed to them by the Lord, and since it was inconsistent to make a distinction, of which God was the author, void and of no moment, it remained for him to remove also this objection. It was indeed evident, that it was a foolish glorying in which the Jews on this account indulged; yet still a doubt remained as to the design of circumcision; for the Lord would not have appointed it had not some benefit been intended. He therefore, by way of an objection, asks, what it was that made the Jew superior to the Gentile; and he subjoins a reason for this by another question, What is the benefit of circumcision? For this separated the Jews from the common class of men; it was a partition-wall, as Paul calls ceremonies, which kept parties asunder.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
SIN AND DIVINE SALVATION
Rom 3:1-31.
THE student of Scripture will discover that as the experience of some hero or heroine holds the readers thought from the beginning to the end of the novel, so the plan of salvation runs through the sacred Scripture, involving, as it does, the true presentation of mans experience, and the person and sacrifice of the Son of God.
It is stated that every cable and every bit of cordage used in the English navy has running through it a scarlet line, a line so interwoven with its texture that you cannot take it out without destroying the cables and cords.
Every sympathetic reader of Scripture will discover a crimson line in the same. It starts in the promise of Gen 3:15, and it concludes with Rev 22:21. There are certain portions of Scripture in which this scarlet line looms, and just as the heart with its capacious ventricles gathers the blood from the veins that it may force it into the arteries, so there are centers of revelation that present the cleansing Blood of Christ at full tide. Certainly the third chapter of Romans is one of those.
On this chapter we bring several observations:
First,
MANS SIN NECESSITATES DIVINE PROPITIATION
Henry Gratten Guinness, Londons matchless scholar, and a world-famed minister, speaking from my pulpit, said:
My text this morning is The Way of Salvation, and the Scripture for study is the Epistle to the Romans. In the first three chapters of this Epistle we find the hell of sin; in the last five chapters we discover the heaven of holiness; and, in the intervening chapters Christ is the Way from the hell of sin to the heaven of holiness.
The remark struck me forcibly at the time, but a more careful study reveals the fact that the division is not so neat as that declaration indicated. The hell of sin extends beyond the third chapter, and the heaven of the last five is not entirely holy; and Christ, the Way, begins even in the first chapter, and continues even unto the last. In other words, the stream of iniquity and the river of salvation run parallel from the first chapter of Romans through the sixteenth; and there are few Books of the Bible in which sin is shown in such hideous mien, and salvation glows with greater splendor.
According to Romans three, Sin is the Transgression of Gods Law, that Transgression is Universal, and Christ is the End of the Law for Righteousness.
Sin is the transgression of Gods Law. The Jew was disposed to think that his covenant relations to God were his full and sufficient justification, and that the ceremony of circumcision was accepted in lieu of holiness. In the second chapter, Paul has repudiated and disproved that doctrine. How natural the question with which this chapter opens, What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? If being a Jew is not justification, and if being circumcised does not effect salvation, what profit?
The answer is adequateMuch every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. The greatest single favor that any people have ever received from God the Father was a revelation of His will; that had been made to Abraham and to his seed after him. Circumcision was a mere incident in that revelation, and the covenant, a small section of the same. The big thing was the revelation itself. That is the big thing to every people who have received it.
Englishmen and Americans are not by nature better than Africans, East Indians or Chinamen; but in proportion as England has enjoyed an open Bible, and America has been instructed from the sacred page, in that proportion have they had immeasurable profit; and as there were certain unbelieving individuals in Israel, and as there are plenty of unbelievers and even atheists in England and America, yet their unbelief did not, and does not, make the faithfulness of God without effect. Gods truth is none the less valuable because men reject it, even as the gold ten dollar piece loses none of its intrinsic worth because it falls into the hands of some fool who thoughtlessly wastes the same. The simple fact is that its true value is emphasized by the contrast of this wasteful folly, even as our unrighteousness commends the righteousness of God, and as our falsehood contrasts His truthfulness, and as our evil doings are condemned by His flawless conduct.
By nature the Jew is no better than the Gentile, for they are not only all under sin, they are all in sin. That Law of God revealed in the Book, and even by the finger of His Spirit written on the tables of mens hearts, they have all violated, and are all under a like condemnation.
Transgression is the universal conduct of men.
There is none righteous, no, not one:
There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
Their feet are swift to shed blood:
Destruction and misery are in their ways:
And the way of peace have they not known:
There is no fear of God before their eyes (Rom 3:10-18).
We grant you that goodness and evil are both comparative. There are some men who are better than others, and some that are worse than their fellows, but there are none that do good. Fallen human nature is constitutionally lawless. All attempts to shield and educate it so as to keep it from transgressing, both the laws of God, as given in the Book, and those laws written in the conscience, have failed to date. Experience therefore bears testimony to the truth of revelation, and all the world is admittedly guilty before God, and the hideousness of sin appears in the lucidity of the law.
But Christ is the end of the law for righteousness, for while it is true that all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23), it is also true that the righteousness of God is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe (Rom 3:22), for our justification is by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus (Rom 3:24).
This is a doctrine that is now increasingly, unpopular with the egotists and self-justifiers of our day. As Robert Ingersoll, Americas notable agnostic, once declared that he didnt want to become a winged pauper of the sky, so many men are now boasting themselves as sufficient, and are consequently denying the necessity of an atonement, and deriding the thought of salvation through the sacrifice of another. But the Book consulted, this stands as the one and only way of salvation, for there is none other name, under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved (Act 4:12).
GOD BY CHRISTS BLOOD, HAS PROVIDED PROPITIATION
Our text tells us of Jesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation (Rom 3:25); and that our God has done this there are abundant Scriptures that teach. That wonderful epitome of the Gospels (Joh 3:16), says, For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. God alone could do this. Mans failure, through sin, sent him to total bankruptcy and left him, therefore, incompetent to provide for himself a way of salvation.
General Fisk tells how he stood once at a slave-block where an old colored Christian minister was being sold. The auctioneer said of the man, What do I hear bid for him? He is a very good kind of a man; He is a minister of the Gospel.
A slave buyer said, $20.00 (He was very old and not worth very much). A second purchaser cried $25.00; $30.00 a third; $35.00 a fourth; $40.00 was the bid of a fifth. The aged minister began to tremble. He had hoped to be able to buy his own freedom, and he had just $70 that he had saved through weary years, and as the bids went on, $45.00, $50.00, $55.00, $60.00, $65.00, the old man trembled from head to foot, and when he heard $65.00, he cried at the top of his voice, $70.00. He was afraid they would outbid him. The men around divined the meaning of his bid. Nobody dared go beyond it, for they felt he wanted his freedom, and the auctioneer struck him down to himself. Done! Done! But, as Dr. Talmage says, We were poorer than was that old African. We could not buy our own deliverance, but God comes forward, as a friend indeed, and says, I will pay the price, and the provision is made.
It was of His grace. The Scriptures abundantly attest this truth. In Rom 5:20-21, we read,
Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much mare abound:
That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
In the Epistle to the Ephesians, the second chapter, verses four and five, we read,
But God, who is rich in mercy, for His great love wherewith He loved us,
Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved) (Eph 2:4-5),
and the eighth verse,
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God (Eph 2:8).
Amazing grace, how sweet the sound,That saved a wretch like me!I once was lost, but now Im found:Was blind, but now I see.
Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,And grace my fears relieved;How precious did that grace appear,The hour I first believed!
Through many dangers, toils, and snares,I have already come;Tis grace has brought me safe thus far,And grace will lead me home.
And it was for sinners! It would not be difficult for the world to understand how God could love saints and provide for them all good. Their loyalty to Him would bring affection from Him. But that which astonishes even the unconverted, which leads to their conviction of sin, is the fact of 1Jn 4:10,
Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins,
and in Rom 5:8; Rom 5:10,
God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us
For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
A friend of mine in Chicago, in an after meeting was spoken to by a mother, who said, There is my unconverted daughter; I wish you would go and talk with her. He went straight to this young lady and said, Dont you want to accept Christ tonight? She stamped her foot in anger, and said, My mother should have known better than to do that. She ought to know it only makes me worse to send people to speak to me. This friend opened his Bible to Isa 53:5-6,
He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed.
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
Instantly the tears began to roll down the cheeks of this young woman, and she said, Oh, I did not know before that God so loved me, and that Jesus Christ was slain for meHis enemy.
THIS PROPITIATION IS PROFFERED TO ALL
In the Epistle to the Heb 2:9, we read,
But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that He by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
And again in 1Jn 2:2,
He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
Not a man left out, so far as the provision was concerned. Propitiation for all!
John McNeill, preaching in Chicago during the Worlds Fair, said he thought of all the people in Jerusalem, Barrabas must have had the best idea of the atonement of Jesus Christ. You will remember, said McNeill, that he should have been crucified and Jesus released, but the order was exactly reversed. The door of the prison swings open and Barrabas is free, and as he comes out into the light of the day, all the people seem to be hurrying in one direction, and he asks them where they are going, and they answer, To see Jesus of Nazareth crucified, and after a moments thought, Barrabas exclaims, Why that is the man that is dying in my stead. He pushes his way through the gate, up the hillside until he reaches the surging mob about the Cross, and working through the crowd until he gets so near to Christ that he can touch the dying Saviour, he says, My friend, I dont know who you are, but I know they put you on the Cross in my stead, and you are dying for me. And, said McNeill, until you can give a better theory of the atonement, take that of BarrabasChrist your substitute, dying in your place.
He is the substitute, not for us only, but for every sinner on earth! His sufferings atoned for all. Rom 5:18 reads,
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of One the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
There are many people who will not be saved, but it will not be because Christ shed His Blood for a few only. He shed that Blood for every man, irrespective of person, for God is no respecter of persons, and whether men will receive the salvation or not, each of them ought to see, and be able to say what one said in the days of the Civil War.
There was a company of bushwhackers arrested in Missouri and sentenced to death. Just as they were about to be shot, a young boy touched the commanding officer on the arm and said, Sir, wont you let me take the place of the man standing yonder? He has a family and will be greatly missed, and I want to take his place. The officer gave his consent. The boy stepped forward and drew the man out of line, standing in his tracks. When the command was given to fire, the boy fell dead, and in the little Missouri town, on the stone that marks his resting place, these words are cut, Sacred to the memory of Willie Lear. He took my place!
The shed Blood of Jesus Christ makes that same speech the necessity of every soul. Gods claim then is upon every man.
He has paid for him this precious price,
Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;
But with the precious Blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot (1Pe 1:18-19).
God has the right to say then what He does in Eze 18:4, Behold, all souls are Mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine.
His propitiation is provided, and proffered, and upon that basis God has a claim upon every man, woman and child.
THIS PROPITIATION IS APPROPRIATED BY FAITH
In our text we read, Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His Blood (Rom 3:25). The proffer is to faith.
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God (Eph 2:8).
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace (Rom 4:16).
Mr. Spurgeon is right in saying that a living faith is the faith that appropriates the promise of God, that takes the promise and presents it to the Father, claiming its fulfilment, just as you present your check to the bank upon which it is drawn, demanding money, because of the signature.
Some years since, in this city, there lived a family in three rooms and in comparative poverty. The husband was a barber working for the small wage men situated as he was commonly commanded, when suddenly there came the news from the East that a wealthy relative of his wife had died, and had left to her a million or more. She could have thrown the letter into the waste basket, saying, No such fortune can be meant for me. But she did not. On the contrary, she went on and asked for that which had been provided for her, and to which, according to the law, she was entitled. Her demand was met, and she became a wealthy woman. Her children needed no longer want for bread or clothing, or elegant home, or first circle of society. Her possessions put her in a place to command all these, and I am glad to say that she was not only rich and increased with goods, but immediately manifested the love she had professed to her Saviour by some generous offerings made to the cause of Christ.
But, through the death of Jesus Christ each believer becomes heir to greater possessions still, heir to the Bread of Life, heir to the Garment of Righteousness, heir to the circle of the saints, heir to the mansions of the skies. No person ever passed from this world to make so many rich in his going as did the Son of God. See what the Scriptures say concerning our inheritance,
All things are youths;
Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours;
And ye are Christs; and Christ is Gods (1Co 3:21-23).
Oh, that by faith we might appropriate the precious promises, for then would we be rich indeed, and see that we have not only propitiation through His Blood, but that by the same Blood every blessing belongs to us!
How firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord,Is laid for your faith in His excellent Word;What more can He say than to you He hath said,To you who for refuge to Jesus have fled?
Tear not, I am with thee; O be not dismayed;For I am thy God, and will still give thee aid;Ill strengthen thee, help thee, and cause thee to stand, Upheld by My righteous, omnipotent hand.
When through the deep waters I call thee to go,The rivers of sorrow shall not overflow;For I will be thee, thy troubles to bless,And sanctify to thee thy deepest distress.
The soul that on Jesus hath leaned for repose,I will not, I will not desert to his foes;That soul, though all hell should endeavor to shake, Ill never, no never, no never forsake.
Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley
CRITICAL NOTES
Rom. 3:1. What advantage then hath the Jew?Pre-eminence. Passage brings out the idea of surplus (Wordsworth).
Rom. 3:3. the faith of Godmay perhaps be best explained by the assertion, God is faithful.
Rom. 3:4. God forbid: yea, let God be true, etc.More proper is it that men should impute unfaithfulness to themselves than to God. God forbidi.e., far be it. An idiomatic exclamation. The sense in which David used the Hebrew word tsadak, and in which his LXX. translators used and , is the sense in which Paul uses them. And mightest overcome.Mayest prevail judicially in thy cause.
Rom. 3:5. If our unrighteousness commend.Sets off to advantage, makes conspicuous. I speak more humano, in such a manner as is intelligible to men.
Rom. 3:7.The truth of God, not objectively, but subjectively. Why should I suffer punishment on account of that which contributes to the glory of God?
Rom. 3:8.Whose judgment is in harmony with right.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Rom. 3:1-8
The surplus to the Jew.The poor Jew has been persecuted, harassed, stripped, and robbed; and yet for the most part he has come forth with a respectable material advantage. The material surplus has been to the Jew. The money-lenders of the nations have been and are still the Jews. They value this surplus. In this respect they are like Christians. The latter profess to despise the former, but there is perhaps more envy than contempt in the feeling. The material surplus is valued more highly than the moral. The bond which we hold for money due is too oft more precious than the bond of Gods oracles, which tells of our indebtedness to the divine Being. Here we have:
I. A great blessing conferred.The blessing of being Gods chosen people, and this affirmed and declared to mankind by the seal of circumcision. The natural Israel a type of the spiritual Israel. How thankful we ought to be for Gods distinguishing favours to the Anglo-Saxon race! The most prosperous race on the face of the earth, because God-enlightened. Let us cherish our privileges. True religion our best and only safeguard. Our Victorias may be submerged; our nearly four hundred gallant men may find a watery grave. He that sails in the ark of Christianity sails in an ark that is secure in all deluges and cannot be overturned by any colliding force. The chief blessing which St. Paul alludes to is that unto the Jew were entrusted the oracles of God. Wonderful that a country which has no literary greatness should have produced the noblest literary volume of all time! No; Palestine did not produce the Old Testament. It came from the better countrythat is, the heavenly. The oracles are not of man, but of God. The bards that sing in these oracles were not taught in the schools of Greece; they learnt the lore of heaventhey speak, but their utterances are in their moral aspect the speakings of God. These oracles are a greater treasure to the Jew than all his material wealth. What honour we render the Jew to-day arises from the fact, not that he is a great money power, but that he has been a great custodian and dispenser of immortal truth. And as we read the New Testament, let us not forget our indebtedness to the Jew. As we study our grand but very difficult epistle, we remember that St. Paul was a Jew. Let us try to realise the fact that unto us have been entrusted the oracles of God. Do we value the truth? Do we put out to usury by scattering the word of God?for we enrich ourselves by striving to enrich others.
II. A great blessing not diminished by rejection.What if some did not believe. The oracles of God are no less true because hypercritics point out discrepancies. The sun is no less a sun because spots are shown on its surface; the eyes are no less useful for seeing because the modern optician pronounces them very imperfect organs of vision. What if some do not believe? I devoutly thank God for my eyesight; I prefer it vastly to the aids of modern opticians. I read gladly the oracles, for I find in them a power to heal, to bless, and to guide which no other oracles afford. I sail in the ark Christ Jesus amid all deluges. The sceptics strive to upset this ark as the Victoria was upset in the Mediterranean, but they have not yet built any water-tight moral vessel.
III. This rejection is the result and proof of unrighteousness.The rejecter of the Bible contends for his moral rectitude, and says that will not allow him to accept what is contrary to reason and to history. He may think himself right; but perhaps he does not know himself as well as he thinks he does. Our metaphysicians examine mind in general, and leave their own mental and moral natures unexplored. A moral twist may turn the intellectual powers in a wrong direction. A rivet may let a bridge fall and destroy many lives. A moral rivet loosely made and set may cause damage. We want, not more intellectual light, but less moral darkness.
IV. The unrighteousness of the rejecter sets forth the eternal rectitude.Out of chaos comes beautiful order, out of seeming evil good, in the wonderful working of divine proceedings. The rejecters of the oracles have led to the discovery of fresh confirmations of their authenticity. The rejecters have been unwittingly builders. So the unrighteousness of man sets forth the righteousness of God. It shines forth all the more brilliantly by the contrast. The rectitude of God is not capable of swerving from the right line. Jesuitical men may say, Let us do evil that good may come. The righteous God says, Forsake evil, and thereby good will come. If at any time the proceedings of God appear to diverge from the straight line of moral rectitude, let us be sure that the fancied divergence is only in appearance. Whatever befalls let this be our noble creed, that God must be true, though this assertion makes all men liars. The rectitude of God is not disproved by strokes of vengeance. A man revenges himself because he is stirred by passion, by envy, by hatred. A God takes vengeance because it is required in the interests of a moral government. The modern God is the amicable guest who winks at the sins of the host. Pauls God is a moral governor as well as an all-father. The rectitude of God constitutes the basis of final judgment. All must come right, for God is right. But all cannot come right to the man who is all wrong, and continues in hardness and impenitence to walk in the wrong. All will come right, and on this we calmly rest our souls. We are not troubled, for all must come right, since God is righteous. All will be well, for God is righteous. Whatever condemnation takes place in the future will be just, for a righteous God is an arbiter of all destinies. Our moralists have their ethical systems, and yet how little they know about what is wrong and what is right! Gods rectitude is the eternal standard of true ethics, and that will be vindicated in the final account. The truth of God will abound, even through human falsehoods, to His glory. The truth of Gods rectitude, and, blessed thought! the truth of Gods love and mercy, will abound to His eternal glory. Let us embrace the mercy, and the rectitude need not cause alarm, if we embrace the mercy as revealed in the crucified One.
Rom. 3:1-2. The oracles of God.Our religious privileges are not to be thought of trifling importance because they do not produce their full effect. They cannot be a substitute for personal holiness; but mans ingratitude does not cancel his obligations, nor does the abuse of privileges destroy their value. Much, O ye Jews, as ye have abused the divine goodness, it has flowed to you in a special manner; and if you ask what advantage you have had, I reply, Much every way, because unto you were committed the oracles of God.
I. The leading characters of the oracles of God.
1. Absolute truth and wisdom. Being from God, the question of their wisdom and truth is settled. We cannot admit that there is a Being of infinite perfection without admitting His perfect wisdom and holiness.
2. The subjects of these oracles are of infinite importance. The oracle always speaks on those questions which are vital to our peace and safety, and on those which are curious rather than useful the oracle is silent. Yet knowledge is not prohibitedonly delayed: What thou knowest not now thou shalt know hereafter. It is sufficient for us now to know how we may be delivered from sin, and from its penalty, eternal death, and how we may daily walk so as to please Him.
3. We have an interesting character given us of the oracles when they are called lively oracles. It is this which constitutes the peculiarity of the word of God. It is a word with which the Spirit of God wonderfully works, and which He renders living. No other book has this peculiarity. Show me one which the wicked fear, which lays a secret dread upon the boldest, which cuts deep into the conscience, which comforts and supports, which deprives death of its stingshow me such a one, and you show me the Bible. Nothing explains this but the life which the Spirit imparts. With the oracles of God the author is present, whether you read or hear. You cannot avoid this power. It will make the word either a savour of life unto life, or a savour of death unto death.
4. The oracles of God not only speak, but make all His other oracles vocal. God has three other oraclesnature, general providence, and personal providence. Nature has its solemn voice: There is not a speech nor language where their voice is not heard. This is connected with the spread of the gospel. The voice of nature is not heard where the gospel is not. In heathen countries the heavens are turned into idols, and God is excluded from the thoughts of men. But when the living oracles come, then star and mountain and river proclaim their glorious Maker, and the voice of the oracle falls distinct upon every ear. There is the general providence of God exercised in the government of nations. All its arrangements display the wisdom, power, and truth of God. Yet it is all unknown to those destitute of the divine oracles. The personal providence of God confers upon us all our blessings, appoints us our station in life, and assigns to us our sorrows. Many lessons this providence teaches us. But till the living oracle speaks all is silence, and we derive no lessons of true wisdom from the events of life.
5. The oracles of God present a peculiar character in their form; and in this we perceive an instance of the condescension of the almighty God, who intended thus to attract and fix our attention on what to us is vitally interesting.
6. The last character is the fulness of truth conveyed in the oracles of God. Who can exhaust the doctrines of Holy Scripturedoctrines specially relating to God and Christ, and the depth of all redeeming love? The Bible will be the oracles of God to the Church above. Every part of that holy book will be written upon the memory of each glorified human heart, and be always receiving illustration to the glory of its great Author.
II. These oracles are committed or entrusted to you.
1. They are entrusted to be read or understood;
2. To interpret honestly;
3. To make them known to others;
4. To apply to practical purposes.R. Watson.
Rom. 3:4. Let God be true.But cannot God be true and man be true also? Does the veracity of the one infer the falsehood of the other? Not absolutely, but in particular instances. There may be, and there often is, an opposition between their testimony; and when this is the case we are not to hesitate a moment by whose claims we shall be decided. If the whole world were on one side and He on the other, let God be true, but every man a liar. And, comparatively, the credibility of the one must always be nothing to that of the other. If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater. And this will appear undeniable from four admissions:
I. The first regards the ignorance of man and the wisdom of God.Man is fallible. He not only may err, but he is likely to err. He may be deceived by outward appearances, by the reports of others, by his own reasonings; for his powers are limited. Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom. How much of it is mere opinion and conjecture! With what follies have the greatest minds been charged! But God knows all things, and cannot be mistaken.
II. The second regards the mutability of man and the unchangeableness of God.Creatures, from their very being, are mutable. Many of the angels kept not their first estate. Adam fell from his original condition. Who needs to be told that man never continues in one stay? New views engender new feelings, and these new pursuits. What pleases to-day may offend to-morrow. But God changes not. What He thinks now He always thought, for with Him there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
III. The third regards the weakness of man and the all-sufficiency of God.Man may threaten in fury, but be unable to executehe may promise sincerely, but cannot fulfil. In this respect he is not always to be judged of by his conduct. But God is almighty. He who made and upholds all things by the word of His power speaks everything in the Scriptures.
IV. The fourth regards the depravity of man and the rectitude of God.Man goes astray. He often knowingly deceives. Even men who are influenced by religious principles may be overcome of evil, and occasion our saying, Lord, what is man? How far from truth was the sentiment of Jonah: I do well to be angry, even unto death! How lamentable was the falsehood of Abraham! How dreadful was the perjury of Peter! But God is holiness itself. He is incapable of a wrong biasHe cannot be tempted to deceive. The use to which this fact should be applied is to reduce our confidence in man and increase our confidence in God. And yet the reverse of this is our practice. We yield where we should be cautious, and we hesitate where it is impossible for us to err. We turn from the Rock of Ages, and lean on the broken reed. What is the consequence? Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord. Let us cease, then, from man. Not that we are to become universally suspicious and suppose that there is no sincerity in the world. It was Davids error to say in his haste, All men are liars. And when the Scripture says, There is no faithfulness in them; men of low degree are vanity, and men of high degree are a lie, it must be taken with a qualification. Yet instances of inflexible integrity are not abundant. And we should not implicitly rely upon any one, especially in divine things. Let us respect great and good men, but not be enslaved by them; let us suffer no man to have dominion over our conscience, always searching the Scriptures to see whether these things are so in the word of truth; for God is entitled to our absolute confidence. God is not a man, that He should lie; neither the son of man, that He should repent: hath He said, and shall He not do it? or hath He spoken, and shall He not make it good? Let us trust Him as He deserves. Let us always place a ready and an unshaken reliance on His word. Yea, let God be true, but every man a liar.W. Jay.
Rom. 3:5. Gods justice not to be ignored.Sinful men, in their eagerness to exculpate themselves, are given to think and say such a horrid thing as this: If a sinners sin cause Gods justice and truth to shine forth more clearly, God has no right to punish the man for that very action by which God Himself, so to speak, has profited. If the Eternal reap good out of my evil, then I deserve no longer blame, at His hands at all events, but rather thanks. This is the perverted logic of evil which is expressed twice over in these words of our text: If our unrighteousness commend (or, set forth in greater clearness) Gods righteousness, what shall we say? That God in inflicting vengeance upon us does an unjust thing? For example: If through a lie of mine the truth of God is made to appear more admirable, to His greater glory, why am I to be still judged as a sinner for it? Every pious heart must sympathise with the indignant rejection by the apostle of so hateful an inference as this. But the arguments by which he rebuts it are very instructive. They are two: neither of them speculative, nor professing to explain the deep mysteries of this tremendous subjectI mean of the relation of God to that sin which He permits and punishes; but both of them simply exposing the practical results which would follow from such a position. It would prove fatal, he argues, both to religion and to morality. In the first place, if God could not justly punish any sin which He is able to overrule for good, then there could be no judgment of the world at all. Obviously it would always be open to a transgressor to plead in bar of judgment that Gods justice was to be somehow made more conspicuous by that very sin; and if this made it unjust in God to punish, how is God to judge the world? Now the final judgment of God is of all religious truths the most fundamental and the most certain. Any doctrine accordingly which should thus paralyse the hand of the final Judge of men or drive Him from His judgment seat is by that very fact shown to be absurd and incredible. Secondly, this blasphemous inference is as fatal to morals as it is to faith. It cuts through the distinction betwixt good and evil. If an act is no longer to be called bad or to be punished out of which some good comes, then you may do any evil you like for the sake of a good result. Of course this is on the face of it to confound moral right and wrong, and by withdrawing all practical restraint on immorality to open a perfect flood-gate of evil. Any doctrine which sanctions such a conclusion is by that very fact, not absurd only, but atrocious. Yet this immoral maxim had actually been imputed to St. Paul by certain of his contemporaries. As he comes in sight of it he cannot restrain his impatient indignation at such a calumny, but breaks through the construction of his sentence to tell us that some actually charged him with teaching and (what was even worse) with practising the vile principle, Let us do evil that good may come. Who they were that said so, or what pretext for saying it they found in his teaching, we can only guess. But there is no question that the evangelical doctrine of a sinners gratuitous justification on the ground of Christs righteousness (which St. Paul is here preparing to prove) has often been assailed on this very chargethat it not only confers immunity upon sinners, but actually holds out to a man an inducement to continue in sin that thereby grace may abound at last to the greater glory of God. Such a charge rests indeed upon a misconception of the gospel, as appears further on in this epistle (Rom. 6:1 ff.). It is flatly oppugnant to that consuming zeal for righteousness which blazes through every portion of this epistle, and especially through the section we have been examining. Whatever Paul taught, every reader feels that he was not a man to teach anything to weaken in the slightest the paramount claims of virtue, or the guilt and hatefulness of sin, or the majesty of Gods judgment, or the wholesome dread of men for a reckoning to come. On the contrary, his whole argument rests on a basis of natural justice. It assumes that Gods final judgment according to human actions is the surest of all things; that it must be impartial; that no religious privilege can lessen responsibility, but must increase it; that you cannot sophisticate sin into anything else than sin; and that God is always just in punishing every soul of man that doeth evil. You feel, therefore, that Paul is speaking out of the very heart of his faith, as well as out of the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, when he flings back with all his strength this hateful calumny, protests against the gospel, any more than the Hebrew law, being made a minister to sin, and declares that every man who ventures to do evil that good may come shall meet with a condemnation which shall be just. On the whole, then, the lesson of this section is to warn us against the insidious temptation, so near to the human heart, to break down the edge of Gods justice against sin, in the hope that somehow He will prove as placable in the last judgment as He is kind and patient now, or to fancy that, because He makes His own use of sin, He will not avenge it on the sinner very strictlyespecially in the case of people who belong to the true religion. All this is most perilous. We who live in Christendom are the privileged class nowadays, as Jews were once. Our superiority over the heathen is enormous in every way; but it confers on us no immunity to sin. It makes our evil deeds not less evil, but more so, that we do them under cover of the Christian name. In our own righteousness, therefore, we dare as little meet God at last with any hope to escape His wrath as an unbaptised infidel dare. Practically we are shut up under singuilty before God, with no apology to plead in bar of judgment. Hopeif we have any hopelies neither in our knowledge of the Bible, nor in our membership in the Church, nor in any fact about ourselves at all, but only in the grace of God through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. Gratuitous justification through the righteousness of our Suretyto that we are shut up by the apostles logic. May God shut us all up to it by what is better than logic, the constraint of His convicting and regenerating Spirit!Oswald Dykes, D.D.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom. 3:1-8
Importance of the third chapter of this epistle.The third chapter of the Epistle to the Romans has, from a very early period of the Christian era, been a special study to Pauls students. It has been regardedand with great justiceas of very peculiar significance in relation to some of the most important doctrines of theology. As regards more particularly the vital doctrine of justification by faith, it is perhaps the principal locus classicus that is to be found in the Bible. At that part of the chapter in which we find the culminating point of the apostles exhibition of this great and favourite theme, Luther, in a marginal note attached to his German translation, arrests the attention of the reader, saying, Take heed to what is here said. It is the central and most important passage of the epistle, and indeed of the entire Scripture. Calvin coincided with Luther in opinion. There is probably, he remarks, no passage in the whole Bible of greater significance as regards the justifying righteousness of God. Corresponding opinions are expressed by multitudes of other theologians and critics whose judgments are entitled to consideration. It is hence the case that, if there be, in an exposition of the third chapter of the Epistle to the Romans anything approximating to a thorough investigation of the broader aspects as well as of the minuter elements of the apostles teaching, there will be the realisation of theological results of no inconsiderable magnitude and moment. The mind will most probably acquire a very definite conception of that article of a standing or a falling Church, justification by faith without works. Such other articles, too, as are inseparably connected with that doctrinethe articles which refer to mans need of a gratuitous method of justification, and to Gods provision of propitiation as the ground or meritorious cause of gracious justification, will probably be apprehended, and to a certain extent even comprehended. In this third chapter of Romans the apostle portrays in a most elaborate manner mans need of gratuitous justification. He likewise exhibits in some most weighty and far-reaching observations the necessity of propitiation, and its relation to justification. He says something, too, of very great significance regarding redemption and the pretermission, as well as the remission, of sins.Morrison.
Paul confutes gainsayers.To understand the full scope and design of this passage, we are to observe that of all the apostles of the Lord St. Paul asserts everywhere in the most copious manner the extensive mercy and compassion of God in entering into a covenant of grace with sinners, and fulfilling faithfully the promises of the gospel, notwithstanding the wickedness and infidelity of mankind, who were corrupted at the heart, and in their daily practice betrayed their impiety and want of faith; and yet so far was the sinner from vacating the evangelical promises, and making them of none effect, that his very sins contributed to Gods glory, and made His truth and grace still more illustrious; for where sin abounded grace did much more abound. From this doctrine of the apostle, not only the sophisters and impostors took occasion to defame and undermine the authority of St. Paul, but the hypocrites and libertines of the age made use of it to countenance and give them a security in their vices. And no wonder; for if the preaching of the apostle were true, that the sins of men redounded to the glory of God, the divine justice could not reasonably exert itself in the punishment of sinners; there could be no encouragement for virtue or religionnay, men were obliged to sin more abundantly, that God might receive the more abundant glory; and it would be their duty on all occasions to do evil that good might come. Other aspersions that were thrown upon the apostle by his enemies he confutes by proper arguments. But this he thought unworthy of an answer; the only expostulates with indignation, and resents it as the vilest slander and as a degree of blasphemy.Bishop Sanderson.
God educes good from evil.David does not excuse his sin on the ground that in its pardon Gods mercy will be glorified, although he says that this will be the result; but he grieves over his sins, and declares that God will judge the world, and that the wicked shall be punished. God may and does exercise His wisdom and power and love in educing the greatest good from the worst evil; but this is the effect of His own incommunicable attributes, and not of mans sins, which are not ordinabilia ad bonam finem. God never does evil in order to elicit good from it, nor does He permit any man to do evil in order that good may come. The intention with which a thing is done is indeed of very great importance; but whatever is sinful is not to be done on the plea of good intention.St. Augustine.
God not an infinite Jesuit.In some of the more dogmatic commentaries, as in Willets, for example, and in that of Pareus, the theological bearing of the jesuitical principle condemned by the apostle is discussed. Willet asks whether God do not evil that good may come thereof in reprobatingviz., unconditionallythe vessels of wrath, to show His power. Such is his question. It is pertinent. But he certainly fails to clear, in the light of his peculiar theology, the character of God. He says that the action referred to is not evil:
1. Because it is Gods will, which is always just and holy.
2. Because that which tendeth to Gods glory cannot be evil.
3. Because that which is lawfully done cannot be evil. God, he adds, in rejecting some doth that which He may do by lawful right to dispose of His own as it pleaseth Him, as no man can reprove the potter in making some vessels of honour, some of dishonour, of the same piece of clay.
4. But, continues he, seeing in the end Gods rejecting and reprobating someviz., such as by their sins deserved eternal deathappeareth to be most just, it must needs also be good; for that which is just is good. In the last of these reasons the critic reverses his own theory of unconditional reprobation; and in the former three he only echoingly reiterates the idea that the jesuitical principle may be to God, though not to man, a legitimate and right glorious rule of conduct. Pareus, a short time before Willet, had trodden exactly the same round of apologetic thought; and thus, so far as we can judge, Feurborn is correct when he contends that the great theologian of Heidelberg has violated the apostles axiom. His whole reasoning seems simply to amount to thisthat God is an infinite Jesuit.Morrison.
All things will manifest Gods glory.If the objections were well founded, it would entirely divest God of the character of judge of the world. The reason of this is manifest, for there is no sin that any man can commit which does not exalt some perfection of God in the way of contrast. If, then, it be concluded that because unrighteousness in man illustrates the righteousness of God, God is unrighteous when He taketh vengeance, it must be further said that there is no sin that God can justly punish; whence it follows that God cannot any longer be the judge of the world. The objection, then, is such that, were it admitted, all the religion in the world would at once be annihilated. For the sin of the world, for which men will be punished, will no doubt be made to manifest Gods glory. Such is the force of the apostles reply.Haldane.
For the holiness of the divinity has blazed forth, as it were, into brighter conspicuousness on the dark ground of human guilt and human turpitude.Chalmers.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Text
Rom. 3:1-9 a. What advantage then hath the Jew? or what is the profit of circumcision? Rom. 3:2 Much every way: first of all, that they were intrusted with the oracles of God. Rom. 3:3 For what if some were without faith? shall their want of faith make of none effect of the faithfulness of God? Rom. 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be found true, but every man a liar; as it is written,
That thou mightest be justified in thy words,
And mightest prevail when thou comest into judgment. Rom. 3:5 But if our unrighteousness commendeth the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who visiteth with wrath? (I speak after the manner of men.) Rom. 3:6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world? Rom. 3:7 But if the truth of God through my lie abounded unto his glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? Rom. 3:8 and why not (as we are slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say), Let us do evil, that good may come? whose condemnation is just. Rom. 3:9 What then? are we better than they?
REALIZING ROMANS, Rom. 3:1-9 a
97.
Who is asking this question of Rom. 3:1? i.e., for whom is Paul asking it?
98.
Why imagine there would be an advantage and profit? cf. Rom. 3:1.
99.
The Jews had the oracles of God, but they did them no good. How did such oracles relate to Christ?
52.
How could the circumcised become uncircumcised and vice versa?
53.
How could Paul say that circumcision was of the heart when it plainly was in the flesh?
100.
Paul says, much in every way. Can you find more than one way mentioned?
101.
Show how the thought, 10,000,000 Jews cant be wrong, was used as an argument by the Jews against Jesus as the Messiah.
102.
Meaning of the words, faithfulness of God, as in Rom. 3:3?
103.
The truth of God is totally apart from man. In what way?
104.
Why should anyone think God would not be justified in His words?
105.
In what sense could God come into judgment?
106.
Does the end ever justify the means? In Rom. 3:5 Paul is suggesting that some feel this is true. Read this verse over very carefully and try to show how.
107.
On what basis or by what standard will God judge the world?
108.
Paul turns the tables on the Jewish objectors. Read Rom. 3:7-8 to see if you can discover in what manner this is done.
109.
How could good possibly result from doing evil? Do not say that some feel that it could. Explain why they felt it.
110.
Who are the we and the they of Rom. 3:9?
111.
There is a wonderful lesson on the dangers of having a form of godliness and denying the power thereof. See if you can find it.
Paraphrase
Rom. 3:1-9 a. If our privileges will procure us no favor at the judgment, and if the want of these privileges will be no disadvantage to the Gentiles, What is the pre-eminence of the Jew above the Gentile? and what is the advantage of circumcision?
Rom. 3:2 It is great in every respect; but chiefly, indeed, because the Jews were intrusted with the oracles of God; especially that concerning the blessing of the nations in Abrahams seed.
Rom. 3:3 But what benefit have we received from the oracles of God, if the greatest part of us have not believed on him whom ye call the seed, and are to be cast off? Will not their unbelief destroy the faithfulness of God, who promised to be a God to Abrahams seed in their generations?
Rom. 3:4 By no means: the faithfulness of God will not be destroyed by the rejection of the Jews. But let God be acknowledged true to his covenant, although every Jew be a liar, in affirming that Jesus is not the promised seed, and be rejected on that account: for as it is written, in all cases God will be justified in his threatenings, and will appear just as often as he punishes.
Rom. 3:5 But if our unrighteousness, in rejecting and crucifying Jesus, establisheth the faithfulness of God in casting us off from being his people, what shall we infer? Is not God unrighteous, who likewise destroyeth us as a nation for that sin? (I write this in the character of an unbelieving Jew.)
Rom. 3:6 By no means: for, if no sin can be righteously punished which is attended with good consequences, how shall God judge the world? How shall he render to every man according to his works?
Rom. 3:7 Your account is not satisfactory; for if the truth of God, in casting off and punishing our nation, hath been manifested to his great honor through our lie, in affirming that Jesus is not the promised seed, why am I, an individual, farther punished also as a sinner? My being involved in the rejection and destruction of the nation, is punishment sufficient.
Rom. 3:8 And to carry your objection farther, why not add, as we are slanderously reported by you Jews to practice, and as many affirm the apostles order, Certainly let us do evil, that glory may accrue to God from our pardon? Of those persons who teach and practice such things, the condemnation is both certain and just.
Rom. 3:9 a Well, then, since the pre-eminence of the Jews above the Gentiles consists in their superior advantages, do we acknowledge that we excel the Gentiles in piety?
Summary
The Jews, in being such, possessed many peculiar advantages, among the most important of which was being entrusted with the revelations of God. Still, though thus highly favored, many of them were very unfaithful. But this will have no effect upon Gods faithfulness. He will remain true, though all men should prove false. Moreover, even when the Jews injustice had the effect to display the justice of God, still God must punish the injustice, and he does right in doing so. We must not do evil that good may come, and we will certainly be punished if we do.
Comment
The argument of Paul would suggest three objections to the Jewish mind. These objections and their answers are the subjects of the first nine verses of the third chapter. The objections are:
a.
If the moral Gentile is better off than the immoral Jew (as you seem to point out in your words concerning circumcision, etc.) what becomes of the Jews advantages? Rom. 3:1
Answer: He still has many advantages. First of all, he has been and is the depository for the oracles of God, the advantage being that within these oracles are the promises of the coming Messiah; thus the Jew was privileged to be the one who could recognize and welcome the Christ when He came, Besides this paramount advantage the oracles also gave him the will of God for his life, and he could thus conduct himself accordingly and receive the approval of God and the benefits of right living in his own person. Rom. 3:2
54.
What was the first of the three objections the Jews had to justification by faith?
55.
What particular advantage did having the oracles of God give the Jew?
Paul, although saying there were many advantages, here only mentions one and does not take up a discussion of any others until chapter nine, verse four.
b.
The second objection is suggested by the answer of the first. Since the Jews have the oracles of God, which contain Gods will, will not their unbelief and consequent disobedience cancel His promises? Rom. 3:3
Answer: God forbid. If every Jew on earth were a liar it would not affect the truthfulness of Jehovah. It is even as the Psalmist has said: God is just in every word spoken and in every case brought to trial he is only proved true. So your faithfulness or lack of it cannot alter the character of God; it can only magnify his eternal righteousness. Rom. 3:4
c.
Again we find the objection growing out of the answer to the foregoing. Here it is: If our unrighteousness only results in the magnifying of Gods righteousness, is he not unrighteous to visit us with wrath? (Paul speaks in the first person in giving this objection, thus indicating that he is speaking as an unbelieving Jew.) Rom. 3:5
Answer: How then shall God judge the world? If, as you say, God now excuses evil and counts it as good because it serves the purpose of establishing his faithfulness, what will be the standard for judgment? Wrong is wrong and sin is sin under whatever conditions it is enacted and regardless of what the final results might be. On what other basis could He judge all men according to their works and be no respecter of persons? Rom. 3:6
The apostle then places before the mind of the Jew the illustration that completes in a unique way the answer to the third objection. He puts himself in the role of the Jew who has offered this objection and then says: You believe what I have been telling you concerning the Messiahship of Jesus of Nazareth is a lie, do you not? Well, if the truth of God (which you claim to have) is made to abound, or to be more evident by my lie, why are you calling me a sinner? (My, what an application of their own principle!) Indeed, says the apostle, why not do the very thing some of you are accusing me ofdo evil that good may come? Why, the justice of condemning those who would so slander the apostle is self-evident. Rom. 3:7-8
56.
State in your own words the second objection.
57.
What is the answer?
58.
Give in your own words the third objection. How is it answered?
59.
How would the third objection destroy the basis for judging the world?
60.
Explain the illustration the apostle uses to complete the answer to the third objection.
In chapter two the need of the Jews was thoroughly dealt with; they were laid under the wrath of God and were thus shown to be without hope except it be in the gospel. In concluding his demonstration of the need of the Jew, Paul found it necessary to digress in order to answer the objections of chapter 3, Rom. 3:1-8. Now he returns to the subject and speaks of the pride of the Jews. Rom. 3:9 a. Even though the Jews see themselves as lost along with the Gentiles, they somehow imagined that in spite of their sin and failure and because of the favors God has bestowed upon them (Rom. 2:17-20) they still were a little bit better than the Gentiles. Paul places himself with them in voicing this egotistical question: What then? are we better than they? He then immediately rebels at the thought and denies it with the strong words, No, in no wise. Rom. 3:9 a
61.
How is it that the Jew could consider himself somewhat better than the Gentile?
Rethinking in Outline Form
2.
Needed by the Jews. Rom. 2:1Rom. 3:9 a
a.
Reasons why the gospel means of justification was needed by the Jew:
(1)
He possessed the law but did not practice it. Since man is to be judged by the law under which he lives, the Jew, like the Gentile, is tragically in need. Rom. 3:1-16
(2)
The Jew boasts of his high standing given him by his possession of the law, but all the while his practice shows him to be no better than the Gentile. Rom. 3:17-24
(3)
His effort to seek special consideration because of circumcision avails nothing, for the true meaning and purpose of circumcision shows it to be of value only to the one who keeps the law. Even the uncircumcised can be counted as circumcised through obedience to his law. Rom. 3:25-29
(4)
The three objections of the Jew to this position are completely answered by Paul. Rom. 3:1-9 a
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
III.
(1-8) Continuing the subject, but with a long digression in Rom. 3:3 et seq. The Apostle asks, What is the real value of these apparent advantages? He is about to answer the question fully, as he does later in Rom. 9:4-5; but after stating the first point, he goes off upon a difficulty raised by this, and does not return to complete what he had begun. This, again, is characteristic of his ardent and keenly speculative mind. Problems such as those which he discusses evidently have a fascination for him, and lead him, here as elsewhere, at once to leave the immediate subject before him, and to enter eagerly into the discussion of them. A more lethargic or timid brain would be under no such temptation.
One real and solid advantage on the part of the Jew was that he was made the direct recipient of the divine revelation. This privilege of his is not annulled by the defection of a part of the people. It rests not upon the precarious fidelity of men, but upon the infallible promise of God. Yet is not the ultimate triumph of that promise any excuse for those who have set it at nought. They will be punished just the same, and rightly. Otherwise there could be no judgment at all. The casuistical objection that sin loses its guilt if it redounds to Gods glory, or, in other words, that the end justifies the means, carries with it its own condemnation.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 3
GOD’S FIDELITY AND MAN’S INFIDELITY ( Rom 3:1-8 ) 3:1-8 What, then, is the something plus which belongs to a Jew? Or what special advantage belongs to those who have been circumcised? Much in every way. In the first place, there is this advantage–that the Jews have been entrusted with the oracles of God. Yes, you say, but what if some of them were unfaithful to them? Surely you are not going to argue that their infidelity invalidates the fidelity of God? God forbid! Let God be shown to be true, though every man be shown to be a liar, as it stands written: “In order that you may be seen to be in the right in your arguments, and that you may win your case when you enter into judgment.” But, you say, if our unrighteousness merely provides proof of God’s righteousness, what are we to say? Surely you are not going to try to argue that God is unrighteous to unleash the Wrath upon you? (I am using human arguments:) God forbid! For, if that were so, how shall God judge the world? But, you say, if the fact that I am false merely provides a further opportunity to demonstrate the fact that God is true, to his greater glory, why should I still be condemned as a sinner? Are you going to argue–just as some slanderously allege that we suggest–that we should do evil that good may come of it? Anyone can see that statements like that merit nothing but condemnation.
Here Paul is arguing in the closest and the most difficult way. It will make it easier to understand if we remember that he is carrying on an argument with an imaginary objector. The argument stated in full would run something like this.
The objector: The result of all that you have been saying is that there is no difference between Gentile and Jew and that they are in exactly the same position. Do you really mean that?
Paul: By no means.
The objector: What, then, is the difference?
Paul: For one thing, the Jew possesses what the Gentile never so directly possessed–the commandments of God.
The objector: Granted! But what if some of the Jews disobeyed these commandments and were unfaithful to God and came under his condemnation? You have just said that God gave the Jews a special position and a special promise. Now you go on to say that at least some of them are under the condemnation of God. Does that mean that God has broken his promise and shown himself to be unjust and unreliable?
Paul: Far from it! What it does show is that there is no favouritism with God and that he punishes sin wherever he sees it. The very fact that he condemns the unfaithful Jews is the best possible proof of his absolute justice. He might have been expected to overlook the sins of this special people of his but he does not.
The objector: Very well then! All you have done is to succeed in showing that my disobedience has given God an opportunity to demonstrate his righteousness. My infidelity has given God a marvellous opportunity to demonstrate his fidelity. My sin is, therefore, an excellent thing! It has given God a chance to show how good he is! I may have done evil, but good has come of it! You can’t surely condemn a man for giving God a chance to show his justice!
Paul: An argument like that is beneath contempt! You have only to state it to see how intolerable it is!
When we disentangle this passage in this way, we see that there are in it certain basic thoughts of Paul in regard to the Jews.
(i) To the end of the day he believed the Jews to be in a special position in regard to God. That, in fact, is what they believed themselves. The difference was that Paul believed that their special position was one of special responsibility; the Jew believed it to be one of special privilege. What did Paul say that the Jew had been specially entrusted with? The oracles of God. What does he mean by that? The word he uses is logia ( G3048) , the regular word in the Greek Old Testament for a special statement or pronouncement of God. Here it means The Ten Commandments. God entrusted the Jews with commandments, not privileges. He said to them, “You are a special people; therefore you must live a special life.” He did not say, “You are a special people; therefore you can do what you like.” He did say, “You are a special people; therefore you must do what I like.” When Lord Dunsany came in safety through the 1914-18 war he tells us that he said to himself, “In some strange way I am still alive. I wonder what God means me to do with a life so specially spared?” That thought never struck the Jews. They never could grasp the fact that God’s special choice was for special duty.
(ii) All through his writings there are three basic facts in Paul’s mind about the Jews. They occur in embryo here; and they are in fact the three thoughts that it takes this whole letter to work out. We must note that he does not place all the Jews under the one condemnation. He puts it in this way: “What if some of them were unfaithful?”
(a) He was quite sure that God was justified in condemning the Jews. They had their special place and their special promises; and that very fact made their condemnation all the greater. Responsibility is always the obverse of privilege. The more opportunity a man has to do right, the greater his condemnation if he does wrong.
(b) But not all of them were unfaithful. Paul never forgot the faithful remnant; and he was quite sure that that faithful remnant–however small it was in numbers–was the true Jewish race. The others had lost their privileges and were under condemnation. They were no longer Jews at all. The remnant was the real nation.
(c) Paul was always sure that God’s rejection of Israel was not final. Because of this rejection, a door was opened to the Gentiles; and, in the end, the Gentiles would bring the Jews back within the fold, and Gentile and Jew would be one in Christ. The tragedy of the Jew was that the great task of world evangelization that he might have had, and was designed to have, was refused by him. It was therefore given to the Gentiles, and God’s plan was, as it were, reversed, and it was not, as it should have been, the Jew who evangelized the Gentile, but the Gentile who evangelized the Jew–a process which is still going on.
Further, this passage contains two great universal human truths.
(i) The root of all sin is disobedience. The root of the Jew’s sin was disobedience to the known law of God. As Milton wrote, it was “man’s first disobedience” which was responsible for paradise lost. When pride sets tip the will of man against the will of God, there is sin. If there were no disobedience, there would be no sin.
(ii) Once a man has sinned, he displays an amazing ingenuity in justifying his sin. Here we come across an argument that reappears again and again in religious thought, the argument that sin gives God a chance to show at once his justice and his mercy and is therefore a good thing. It is a twisted argument. One might as well argue–it would, in fact, be the same argument–that it is a good thing to break a person’s heart, because it gives him a chance to show how much he loves you. When a man sins, the need is not for ingenuity to justify his sin, but for humility to confess it in penitence and in shame.
THE CHRISTLESS WORLD ( Rom 3:9-18 ) 3:9-18 What then? Are we Jews out ahead? By no means. For we have already charged all Jews and Greeks with being under the power of sin, as it stands written: “There is none righteous, no not one. There is no man of understanding. There is none who seeks the Lord. All have swerved out of the way, and all together have gone bad. There is none whose acts are good, not one single one. Their throat is an open tomb. They practise fraud with their tongues. The poison of asps is under their lips. Their mouths are laden with curses and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood. Destruction and wretchedness are in their ways, and they have not known the way of peace. There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
In the last passage Paul had insisted that, in spite of everything, the Jew had a special position in the economy of God. Not unnaturally the Jewish objector then asks if that means that the Jews are out ahead of other peoples. Paul’s answer is that Jew and Gentile alike, so long as they are without Christ, are under the dominion of sin. The Greek phrase that he uses for under sin is very suggestive, hupo ( G5259) hamartian ( G266) . In this sense hupo ( G5259) means in the power of, under the authority of. In Mat 8:9 the centurion says: “I have soldiers hupo ( G5259) emauton ( G1683) , under me.” That is, I have soldiers under my command. A schoolboy is hupo ( G5259) paidagogon ( G3807) , under the direction of the slave who is in control of him. A slave is hupo ( G5259) zugon ( G2218) , under the yoke of his master. In the Christless state a man is under the control of sin, and helpless to escape from it.
There is one other interesting word in this passage. It is the word in Rom 3:12 which we have translated. “They have gone bad.” The word is achreioo ( G889) , which literally means to render useless. One of its uses is of milk that has gone sour. Human nature without Christ is a soured and useless thing.
We see Paul doing here what Jewish Rabbis customarily did. In Rom 3:10-18 he has strung together a collection of Old Testament texts. He is not quoting accurately, because he is quoting from memory, but he includes quotations from Psa 14:1-3; Psa 5:9; Psa 140:3; Psa 10:7; Isa 59:7-8; Psa 36:1. It was a very common method of Rabbinic preaching to string texts together like this. It was called charaz (see charuwz, H2737) , which literally means stringing pearls.
It is a terrible description of human nature in its Christless state. Vaughan has pointed out that these Old Testament quotations describe three things. (i) A character whose characteristics are ignorance, indifference, crookedness and unprofitableness. (ii) A tongue whose notes are destructive, deceitful, malignant. (iii) A conduct whose marks are oppression, injuriousness, implacability. These things are the result of disregard of God.
No one saw so clearly the evil of human nature as Paul did; but it must always be noted that the evil of human nature was to him, not a call to hopelessness, but a challenge to hope. When we say that Paul believed in original sin and the depravity of human nature, we must never take that to mean that he despaired of human nature or looked on it with cynical contempt. Once, when William Jay of Bath was an old man, he said: “My memory is failing, but there are two things that I never forget–that I am a great sinner and that Jesus Christ is a great Saviour.”
Paul never underrated the sin of man and he never underrated the redeeming power of Jesus Christ. Once, when he was a young man, William Roby, the great Lancashire Independent, was preaching at Malvern. His lack of success drove him to despair, and he wished to leave the work. Then came a seasonable reproof from a certain Mr Moody, who asked him, “Are they, then, too bad to be saved?” The challenge sent William Roby back to his work. Paul believed men without Christ to be bad, but he never believed them too bad to be saved. He was confident that what Christ had done for him Christ could do for any man.
THE ONLY WAY TO BE RIGHT WITH GOD ( Rom 3:19-26 ) 3:19-26 We know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are within the law, and the function of the law is that every mouth should be silenced and that the whole world should be known to be liable to the judgment of God, because no one will ever get into a right relationship with God by doing the works which the law lays down. What does come through the law is a full awareness of sin. But now a way to a right relationship to God lies open before us quite apart from the law, and it is a way attested by the law and the prophets. For a right relationship to God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. For there is no distinction, for all have sinned and all fall short of the glory of God, but they are put into a right relationship with God, freely, by his grace, through the deliverance which is wrought by Jesus Christ. God put him forward as one who can win for us forgiveness of our sins through faith in his blood. He did so in order to demonstrate his righteousness because, in the forbearance of God, there had been a passing over of the sins which happened in previous times; and he did so to demonstrate his righteousness in this present age, so that he himself should be just and that he should accept as just the man who believes in Jesus.
Here again is a passage which is not easy to understand, but which is full of riches when its true meaning is grasped. Let us see if we can penetrate to the basic truth behind it.
The supreme problem of life is, How can a man get into a right relationship with God? How can he feel at peace with God? How can he escape the feeling of estrangement and fear in the presence of God? The religion of Judaism answered: “A man can attain to a right relationship with God by keeping meticulously all that the law lays down.” But to say that is simply to say that there is no possibility of any man ever attaining to a right relationship with God, for no man ever can keep every commandment of the law.
“Not the labours of my hands
Can fulfil thy law’s demands.”
What then is the use of the law? It is that it makes a man aware of sin. It is only when a man knows the law and tries to satisfy it that he realizes he can never satisfy it. The law is designed to show a man his own weakness and his own sinfulness. Is a man then shut out from God? Far from it, because the way to God is not the way of law, but the way of grace; not the way of works, but the way of faith.
To show what he means Paul uses three metaphors.
(i) He uses a metaphor from the law courts which we call justification. This metaphor thinks of man on trial before God. The Greek word which is translated to justify is diakioun ( G1344) . All Greek verbs which end in “-oun” mean, not to make someone something, but to treat, to reckon, to account him as something. If an innocent man appears before a judge then to treat him as innocent is to acquit him. But the point about a man’s relationship to God is that he is utterly guilty, and yet God, in his amazing mercy, treats him, reckons him, accounts him as if he were innocent. That is what justification means.
When Paul says that “God justifies the ungodly,” he means that God treats the ungodly as if he had been a good man. That is what shocked the Jews to the core of their being. To them to treat the bad man as if he was good was the sign of a wicked judge. “He who justifies the wicked is an abomination to the Lord” ( Pro 17:15). “I will not acquit the wicked” ( Exo 23:7). But Paul says that is precisely what God does.
How can I know that God is like that? I know because Jesus said so. He came to tell us that God loves us, bad as we are. He came to tell us that, although we are sinners, we are still dear to God. When we discover that and believe it, it changes our whole relationship to God. We are conscious of our sin, but we are no longer in terror and no longer estranged. Penitent and brokenhearted we come to God, like a sorry child coming to his mother, and we know that the God we come to is love.
That is what justification by faith in Jesus Christ means. It means that we are in a right relationship with God because we believe with all our hearts that what Jesus told us about God is true. We are no longer terrorized strangers from an angry God. We are children, erring children, trusting in their Father’s love for forgiveness. And we could never have found that right relationship with God, if Jesus had not come to live and to die to tell us how wonderfully he loves us.
(ii) Paul uses a metaphor from sacrifice. He says of Jesus that God put him forward as one who can win forgiveness for our sins.
The Greek word that Paul uses to describe Jesus is hilasterion ( G2435) . This comes from a verb which means to propitiate. It is a verb which has to do with sacrifice. Under the old system, when a man broke the law, he brought to God a sacrifice. His aim was that the sacrifice should turn aside the punishment that should fall upon him. To put it in another way–a man sinned; that sin put him at once in a wrong relationship with God; to get back into the right relationship he offered his sacrifice.
But it was human experience that an animal sacrifice failed entirely to do that. “Thou hast no delight in sacrifice; were I to give a burnt offering, thou wouldst not be pleased” ( Psa 51:16). “With what shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before God on high? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my first-born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?” ( Mic 6:6-7.) Instinctively men felt that, once they had sinned, the paraphernalia of earthly sacrifice could not put matters right.
So Paul says, “Jesus Christ, by his life of obedience and his death of love, made the one sacrifice to God which really and truly atones for sin.” He insists that what happened on the Cross opens the door back to a right relationship with God, a door which every other sacrifice is powerless to open.
(iii) Paul uses a metaphor from slavery. He speaks of the deliverance wrought through Jesus Christ. The word is apolutrosis ( G629) . It means a ransoming, a redeeming, a liberating. It means that man was in the power of sin, and that Jesus Christ alone could free him from it.
Finally, Paul says of God that he did all this because he is just, and accepts as just all who believe in Jesus. Paul never said a more startling thing than this. Bengel called it “the supreme paradox of the gospel.” Think what it means. It means that God is just and accepts the sinner as a just man. The natural thing to say would be, “God is just, and, therefore, condemns the sinner as a criminal.” But here we have the great paradox–God is just, and somehow, in that incredible, miraculous grace that Jesus came to bring to men, he accepts the sinner, not as a criminal, but as a son whom he still loves.
What is the essence of all this? Where is the difference between it and the old way of the law? The basic difference is this–the way of obedience to the law is concerned with what a man can do for himself; the way of grace is concerned with what God can do, and has done, for him. Paul is insisting that nothing we can ever do can win for us the forgiveness of God; only what God has done for us can win that; therefore the way to a right relationship with God lies, not in a frenzied, desperate, doomed attempt to win acquittal by our performance; it lies in the humble, penitent acceptance of the love and the grace which God offers us in Jesus Christ.
THE END OF THE WAY OF HUMAN ACHIEVEMENT ( Rom 3:27-31 ) 3:27-31 Where, then, is there any ground for boasting? It is completely shut out. Through what kind of law? Through the law of works? No, but through the law of faith. So, then, we reckon that a man enters into a right relationship with God by faith quite apart from works of the law. Or, is God the God of the Jews only? Is he not the God of the Gentiles? Yes, he is the God of the Gentiles too. If, indeed, God is one, he is the God who will bring those who are of the circumcision into a right relationship with himself by faith, and those who never knew the circumcision through faith. Do we then through faith completely cancel out all law? God forbid! Rather, we confirm the law.
Paul deals with three points here.
(i) If the way to God is the way of faith and of acceptance, then all boasting in human achievement is gone. There was a certain kind of Judaism which kept a kind of profit and loss account with God. In the end a man often came to a frame of mind in which he rather held that God was in his debt. Paul’s position was that every man is a sinner and God’s debtor, that no man could ever put himself back into a right relationship with God through his own efforts and that grounds for self-satisfaction and boasting in one’s own achievement no longer exist.
(ii) But, a Jew might answer, that might be well enough for a Gentile who never knew the law, but what about Jews who do know it? Paul’s answer was to turn them to the sentence which is the basis of the Jewish creed, the sentence with which every synagogue service always began and still begins. “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one God” ( Deu 6:4). There is not one God for the Gentiles and another for the Jews. God is one. The way to him is the same for Gentile and Jew. It is not the way of human achievement; it is the way of trusting and accepting faith.
(iii) But, says the Jew, does this mean an end of all law? We might have expected Paul to say, “Yes.” In point of fact he says, “No.” He says that, in fact, it strengthens the law. He means this. Up to this time the Jew had tried to be a good man and keep the commandments because he was afraid of God, and was terrified of the punishment that breaches of the law would bring. That day has for ever gone. But what has taken its place is the love of God Now a man must try to be good and keep God’s law, not because he fears God’s punishment, but because he feels that he must strive to deserve that amazing love. He strives for goodness, not because he is afraid of God, but because he loves him. He knows now that sin is not so much breaking God’s law as it is breaking God’s heart, and, therefore, it is doubly terrible.
Take a human analogy. Many a man is tempted to do a wrong thing, and does not do it. It is not so much that he fears the law. He would not greatly care if he were fined, or even imprisoned. What keeps him right is the simple fact that he could not meet the sorrow that would be seen in the eyes of the one who loves him if he made shipwreck of his life. It is not the law of fear but the law of love which keeps him right. It must be that way with us and God. We are rid forever of the terror of God, but that is no reason for doing as we like. We can never again do as we like for we are now for ever constrained to goodness by the law of love; and that law is far stronger than ever the law of fear can be.
-Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)
Fuente: Barclay Daily Study Bible
(b.) Admission of the Jews’ advantage, chiefly in the divine oracles, Rom 3:1-2 .
The Jew is highly dissatisfied at being in the two preceding chapters placed by the apostle upon a level of guilt and condemnation with the Gentiles. He demands what advantage the apostle allows the Jew, (Rom 3:1.) Nay, as Jewish unbelief really sets God’s faithfulness in a clearer light, that unbelief itself was rather a merit than a sin, (Rom 3:5.) And in final astonishment he demands if the Jew is in no respect better than the Gentile, (Rom 3:9.)
The apostle, accustomed to hear such objections in his various argumentation with the Jews in their synagogues, very concisely states (not in the Jew’s words, but his own) and refutes them here.
The advantage of the Jew is, comprehensively, the possession of God’s revelation, (Rom 3:2😉 an advantage which the defection of a part of the race could not neutralize, (Rom 3:3.) He admits that God’s faithfulness is illustrated by Jewish apostasy, but denies that such fact lessens their just penalty from God, since such a concession would subvert God’s very judgment throne over the world, (Rom 3:6,) and lead to justifying our sins by the good that might illegitimately result from them, (Rom 3:8.) And, finally, to the despairing query of the Jew whether the advantage of the Jew did not embrace the being morally better, he gives a prompt and decisive no, and sustains his fearful negative with a running summary of passages of condemnation from their own Scriptures, (9-20.)
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1. Advantage The question arrays the claim of Christianity against the proud superiority of Judaism. The apostle must conciliate that pride as far as possible, without surrendering a particle of Christianity. He, therefore, in the next verse makes generous concession.
The points here briefly touched in relation to Israel’s advantages, his failure through unbelief, and God’s defence therefor, are more fully treated in chapter 9. And the two passages, being parallel, are each the apostle’s own commentary upon the other.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
2. Condition of the Jewish Race, Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20 .
The case of the Jew (17-24) with the written law is essentially parallel with that of the Gentile with the unwritten law, 12-15. Yet the apostle treats with a more careful deference. By a series of interrogations, more delicate yet more forcible than affirmations, he exhibits the wide discrepancies between their boasting of the law and their persistent breaking it. Gradually and carefully he approaches the conclusion that the case of the Jew is no better at best than that of the Gentile.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘What advantage then does the Jew have? Or what is the profit of circumcision?’
The question then arises that if the Jew who is unrighteous has no special privileges because of his unrighteousness (Rom 2:11-13; Rom 2:21-24), and if physical circumcision loses its validity for man when he is unrighteous (Rom 2:25-29), what are the advantages (to perisson – here meaning to have what is beyond what others have) of being a Jew and what profit is there in being circumcised? This is the first question put by his imaginary opponent, phrased, of course, by Paul. Many Jews believed that the advantage was that, whatever they might suffer in this life, they would have eternal life because God was bound by His covenant.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
If This Be So What Advantage Is There In Being A Jew? (3:1-8).
In a series of questions Paul now takes up the points just made, the claimed advantage of being a Jew (Rom 2:17-20) and the claimed advantage of circumcision (Rom 2:25-29). His reply is that both are true simply because it was to the Jews that God had entrusted the oracles of God. It was through those oracles that man could know righteousness. They had thus had the advantage of the given word of God, first through Moses and then through the prophets, for over a thousand years. It should have made them aware of God’s righteousness (Rom 3:4) and of their own unrighteousness (Rom 3:5; Rom 3:10-18) and of the need therefore to genuinely seek God’s way of atonement, initially through the system of offerings and sacrifices, and now through the One Whose death has made provision for ‘the sins done aforetime’ (Rom 3:25). In Rom 3:10-18 he will use those same oracles in order to prove that all are under sin, whether they be Jew or Greek.
However, underlying what he says here is an important principle. He is not just wanting to bring the Jews into the common condemnation but is also underlining the fact of God’s pure righteousness which must deal with sin as it is. Nothing must be allowed to evade the fact that God must call it into account and punish it accordingly, and that was true for all, both Jew and Gentile (Rom 3:9).
An important question to be solved in these verses is as to when Paul is speaking and when it is his opponent. But even when that is decided we must recognise that in the last analysis it is Paul who has framed the questions being asked. Thus we can see Paul as teaching even in the very questions.
The question and answer method is interesting. It occurs throughout the first half of the letter (Rom 3:1 ff; Rom 4:1 ff; Rom 6:1 ff; Rom 6:15 ff; Rom 7:7 ff) and suggests that Paul has vividly in mind his arguments with Jews and Christian Judaisers who had brought these charges against him (something specifically stated in Rom 3:8). He wants them to be nailed down once and for all.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Advantage of the Jews: God’s Oracles In Rom 3:1-8 Paul explains the advantage of being a Jew, which is the fact that to them God delivered the oracles of God. These oracles would include the Mosaic Law as well as the many times God spoke to Israel through the prophets.
Rom 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
Rom 3:1
Eph 2:12, “That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:”
Rom 3:1 “or what profit is there of circumcision” – Comments – Rom 3:1 shows a typical Hebrew construction, where the second phrase in essence restates the first phrase. The phrase “what profit is there of circumcision” is a paraphrase that describes a Jew. Circumcision was one of a Jew’s most distinctive characteristics.
Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Rom 3:2
“chiefly” – Comments – The most important single aspect of being a Jew is the fact that God gave unto them His Laws and spoke to them through the prophets.
“because that unto them were committed the oracles of God” Comments – The most obvious advantage to being a Jew is the fact that God delivered unto them the divine oracles and laws, which reveal God’s plan of redemption to mankind. God entered into a covenant with the Jews and entrusted the Jews with His Word, just like God entrusted Paul with the Gospel to the Gentiles, who are called the uncircumcision (Gal 2:7).
Gal 2:7, “But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter.”
Psa 147:19-20 states the same truth as Rom 3:2:
Psa 147:19-20, “He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the LORD.”
Paul will refer to these advantages again in Rom 9:4, where he will briefly list other advantages.
Rom 9:4, “Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises”
Comments – The classical writers reveal that the concept of sacred mysteries being utters as divine oracles was practiced in the ancient world. Regarding the use of oracles, the ancient Greeks regarded divine oracles as a form of worship until the time of the Persian war (490-479 B.C.). [153] The temple of Apollo located at Delphi was famous in the ancient world for delivering oracles to men by those in a trance, or they interpreted dreams or patterns in nature. [154] The Greek historians Herodotus (484-425 B.C.) [155] and Plutarch (A.D. 46-100) [156] mention this place of oracles in their writings. While the Romans as a nation did not regard oracles as a religious practice, this custom continued within the Empire, but not without the contempt of the Romans. [157] This practice was later outlawed under the Roman emperor Theodosius (A.D. 379-385). [158] King Saul’s visit to the witch of Endor shows its popularity among ancient eastern cultures (1Sa 28:7-25). The damsel who prophesied over Paul and Barnabas in Philippi is an example of the proliferation of divination in the New Testament times (Act 16:16-24). The Sibylline Oracles, [159] a collection of Greek oracles compiled by Jews and Christians in the early centuries before and after Christ, reflect the widespread popularity that the Sibyl prophetesses held in ancient Greek and Roman history. Regarding the concept of “mysteries” ( ) revealed through oracles, Plutarch, writing about the Pythian priestesses who prophesied at Delphi, speaks of “interpreters of the sacred mysteries.” [160] Thus, when Paul refers to the mysteries hidden from the ages being revealed to the Church (Rom 16:25, 1Co 2:7, Eph 1:9; Eph 3:3-4; Eph 3:9; Eph 6:19, Col 1:26; Col 2:2; Col 4:3, 1Ti 3:9), or when Luke, Paul, and Peter speak of the “oracles” ( ) (G3051) of God (Act 7:38, Rom 3:2, Heb 5:12, 1Pe 4:11), they are speaking in a cultural language that the Greeks and Romans understood, where pagans frequently sought oracles through divine utterance at the temples to reveal hidden mysteries for their lives.
[153] C. H. Prichard, “Oracle,” in A Dictionary of the Bible, vol. 3, ed. James Hastings (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1901), 629.
[154] R. F. Youngblood, F. F. Bruce, R. K. Harrison, and Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, rev. ed. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 2.1c [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2000-2004), “Oracle.”
[155] Herodotus writes, “and he [Dorieus] asked the Spartans for a company of folks, whom he took away as colonists; he neither enquired of the oracle at Delphi in what land he should plant his settlement, nor did aught else that was customary” ( Histories 5.42) See Herodotus III, trans. A. D. Godley, in The Loeb Classical Library, eds. T. E. Page, E. Capps, and W. H. D. Rouse (London: William Heinemann, 1938), 46-47.
[156] Plutarch tells us that the Sibylline prophetesses of Delphi used poetic verses with their prophecies, saying, “for when we drew near that part of the rock which joins to the senate-house, which by common fame was the seat of the first Sibyl that came to Delphi from Helicon, where she was bred by eh MusesSerapio made mention of certain verses of hers, wherein she had extolled herself as one that should never cease to prophesy even after her death” ( Wherefore the Pythian Priestess Now Ceases to Deliver Her Oracles in Verse 9) He later writes, “but I am constrained to claim your first promise, to tell me the reason wherefore now the Pythian prophetess no longer delivers her oracles in poetic numbers and measuresand also the temple of Tellus, to which the oracle appertained, and where the answers were delivered in verses and song.” ( Wherefore the Pythian Priestess Now Ceases to Deliver Her Oracles in Verse 17) See William W. Goodwin, Plutarch’s Essays and Miscellanies, vol. 3 (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1911), 77, 86-87.
[157] The Roman poet Lucan (A.D. 39-65) reflects the contempt for such oracles by the Romans when he writes, “They had now come to the Temple, the only one which among the Libyan nations the uncivilized Garamantes possess. There stands Jupiter, the foreteller of destiny, as they relate; but not either brandishing the lightnings or like to ours, but Ammon with crooked horns.” ( Pharsalia 9.593-598) See H. T. Riley, The Pharsalia of Lucan (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1853), 359.
[158] C. H. Prichard, “Oracle,” In A Dictionary of the Bible, ed. James Hastings (), 629.
[159] The Sibylline Oracles, trans. H. C. O. Lanchester, in The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English With Introductions and Critical and Explanatory Notes to the Several Books, vol. 2, ed. R. H. Charles (electronic edition), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 2.1c [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2000-2004).
[160] Plutarch writes, “The interpreters of the sacred mysteries acted without any regard to us, who desired them to contract their relation into as few words as might be, and to pass by the most part of the inscriptions.” ( Wherefore the Pythian Priestess Now Ceases to Deliver Her Oracles in Verse 2) See William W. Goodwin, Plutarch’s Essays and Miscellanies, vol. 3 (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1911), 70.
Rom 16:25, “Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,”
1Co 2:7, “But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:”
Eph 1:9, “Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:”
Eph 3:3-4, “How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)”
Eph 3:9, “And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:”
Eph 6:19, “And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,”
Col 1:26, “Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:”
Col 2:2, “That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;”
Col 4:3, “Withal praying also for us, that God would open unto us a door of utterance, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds:”
1Ti 3:9, “Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.”
Act 7:38, “This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:”
Rom 3:2, “Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.”
Heb 5:12, “For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.”
1Pe 4:11, “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.”
The reference to pillars and foundations of the Church in 1Ti 3:15 suggests that Paul had in mind the ancient Greek and Roman temples with their practice of divination, and that he compares this pagan scene of worship to the New Testament Church and the Holy Scriptures, which serve as its pillars and foundation.
Rom 3:3 “For what if some did not believe?” Comments – That is, “if some of the Jews did not believe.”
Rom 3:3 “shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?” Comments – That is, “Does the Jews’ failure to believe in these divine oracles nullify the “faith of God,” which refers to God’s plan of redemption for the Jews (and Gentiles)?”
Rom 3:3 Comments – The same Greek word translated in Rom 3:2 as “committed” is translated here in Rom 3:3 as “believe.” Therefore, if God believed in this nation to fulfill His plan of salvation by entrusting them with His oracles, then the unbelief of a few Jews does not nullify God’s willingness to continue to use the Jewish people in His redemptive plan. Paul is careful here to avoid saying that the entire nation of Israel has fallen into unbelief, because there were Jews who did believe in Jesus Christ as the Messiah.
Many Jews believed were God’s children and qualified to receive God’s blessings because of their Jewish birth (Mat 3:9, Luk 3:8, Joh 3:8). They trusted in the Law to justify them before God (Rom 2:17).
Mat 3:9, “And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.”
Luk 3:8, “Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.”
Joh 8:39, “They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham.”
Rom 2:17, “Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,”
God made a covenant with the Jews and He gave them His Words. Rom 3:3 says that if some of these Jews did not remain faithful to the covenant, would this void the entire covenant between God and the Jewish nation? Of course it would not. Rom 3:3 teaches us that God is still committed to working in and through the nation of Israel. Just because some of the Jews were unfaithful to God’s Word, it does it mean that God is going to be unfaithful to His Word and to His part of His covenant to the nation of Israel. If God were not faithful to fulfill His part of the covenant, then the Jews would not stand condemned as sinners. However, God has been faithful to His Word. Therefore, the unbelieving Jews stand condemned for not fulfilling their part of the divine covenant.
Illustration – If two men agree to do something for each other, and one backs out of the deal and does not do his part, does this void the agreement. No, it does not. It just shows that one man had broken his end of the deal.
Illustration – A man at church asked Jack Emerson if he would cut a tree down for a cost of $300. Jack said, “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.” So, Jack agreed to cut the tree down for $300. This was the first covenant that was made. Jack asks for some help and several men agree to help him. They enter into this covenant. When the work began, these helpers find the job too difficult. They did not realize what they had gotten themselves into. So, some who agreed to help Jack backed out and went home. Jack said to the man who wanted the tree cut down, “I cannot cut it down now without help.” The man held Jack to his word. This illustrates that a covenant is not nullified just because some people were unfaithful to keep their word. Jack did not know that other tree surgeons had tried also but failed to do this job. So, Jack asked the man to raise the pay to $500. The man agreed and the job was completed.
God is always faithful to fulfill His Word and His promises, even when man is not faithful. He will never deny His Word when we trust Him in it. We can note two truths in 2Ti 2:13. First, God is always faithful. Second, man can be unfaithful. So, the problem is not ever with God, but always with man. God will never deny what He said He would do. He will never change and deny a promise He made to you. As a growing believer, I had to shoulder up to my responsibility that the problem is with me, not God, when things did not work out.
2Ti 2:13, “If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.”
Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Rom 3:4
Psa 51:4, “Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.”
Rom 3:5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man)
Rom 3:5
Illustration – Someone once asked me, “Do you believe that God made Adam and Eve and put them in the garden, knowing that they would fall in sin by temptation, then curse them?” This person was trying to say that it does not seem fair that God would make a man knowing he will sin, then turn around and curse and condemn the man. I responded to him and said, “Who are we to answer against the Almighty God. We are like a piece of clay, and God is the potter. He does as He pleases. We are just mortal human beings.”
Rom 3:5 Comments – The Gospel demonstrates God’s righteousness by declaring the sinfulness of mankind (Rom 1:17).
Rom 1:17, “For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.”
Rom 3:6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?
Rom 3:6
Rom 3:7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?
Rom 3:7
Rom 3:7 “why yet am I also judged as a sinner” Comments – The oracles of God, the Old Testament, show man’s sinful nature in contrast to God’s holiness. Our sins show God’s righteousness, but does this mean we are encouraged to abound in sin in order to do this? This will not do anything but declare us more sinful.
Rom 3:7 Comments – In Rom 3:7 Paul restates what he said in Rom 3:5, “But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say?” Paul’s opponents were asking, “Why does God judge us as sinners, since through our lies (our sins) God is acknowledged as a God worth of glory? So why not continue is sin so good can result, such as giving God glory?” Paul counters these accusations against him.
Rom 3:7 can be paraphrased, “If by our lies and our sins, God’s truth and righteous standards bring Him glory, why is mankind still considered a sinner,” and he is not, therefore, able to conclude, “let us do evil, for good to come.” The AmpBible reads, “ But [you say] if through my falsehood God’s integrity is magnified and advertised and abounds to His glory, why am I still being judged as a sinner?” (Rom 3:7)
God is shown to be righteous because our sins show His truth to be righteous, and it continues to show man as a sinner. Since our sins show God’s truth and righteousness, and through this truth man continues to be judged as a sinner, there is no way that a man can truly reason that by doing evil, any good can come. Sin just proves us to be ever so much a sinner and in judgment of a righteous God.
Rom 3:8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
Rom 3:8
2Pe 3:16, “As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures , unto their own destruction.”
Paul faced much Jewish opposition (Act 21:12).
Act 21:21, “And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.”
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Calling of the Gentiles and Jews In Roman Rom 1:8 to Rom 3:20 Paul reveals how God has called Gentiles and Jews through the Gospel of His Son (Rom 1:8-17) because (1) mankind has rejected God’s call through the revelation of His creation (Rom 1:18-32), which revelation bore witness to man’s understanding of God through his mind, (2) man has rejected God’s call through his conscience (Rom 2:1-16), which conscience is the voice of man’s heart, (3) and man has rejected God’s call through the Mosaic Law (Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20), which bears witness to man’s unrighteous deeds and actions of his body. Thus, God has testified of Himself to man’s mind, spirit, and body, the triune make-up of man. In this section revealing God’s call to mankind, Paul expound s upon His method of divine judgment because of the fact that all have sinned, the Jew as well as the Gentile.
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
1. The Calling of the Gentiles thru the Gospel Rom 1:8-17
2. God’s Wrath Reveals Man’s Rejection of His Call Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20
Justification Begins with the Depravity of Mankind – As a side note, it is interesting that Paul does not begin his exposition on justification by discussing the existence of God, but rather, by explaining the depravity of mankind. However, Paul does make a brief statement about the witness of God’s existence in Rom 1:19-20, where creation testifies of a general revelation of mankind.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
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
God’s Wrath Reveals Man’s Rejection of His Call Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20 gives us a lengthy teaching on the depravity of mankind, both Gentile and Jew. Throughout this lengthy passage Paul will explain how man’s sinful nature serves as a testimony of why God is righteousness in inflicting His wrath upon mankind from heaven, as stated in Rom 1:18, which is the underlying theme of this passage in Romans. Since the Gospel of Jesus Christ declares man’s depravity and God’s righteous judgments, then man’s depravity also serves to reveal God’s righteous judgments. In this passage of Scripture Paul builds a case for man’s depravity so that he can explain in the subsequent passage of God’s only way of justification for mankind, which is through faith in Jesus Christ.
The first way that we understand God’s standard of righteousness is to be made aware of His divine wrath that rests upon a depraved humanity. Therefore, Paul will first expound upon man’s unrighteousness, or depravity, and show how God has given man over to his unrighteous passions. God pours out His divine wrath because He has revealed His divine nature to mankind (Rom 1:19-20), and they have rejected it (Rom 1:21). Thus, Paul proves that God’s standard of righteousness for mankind has been revealed to him since he was created in the Garden of Eden. There is, therefore, no excuse for sin and depravity. Rather, it is a choice that man makes for himself.
In Rom 1:18-32 Paul reveals man’s depravity and rejection of God. He explains how God has revealed Himself to mankind (Rom 1:19-20) and how man has fully rejected Him (Rom 1:21-32). Thus, we understand why God the Father has destined all of mankind to divine wrath. Paul then broadens his definition of depravity by addressing those who condemn evil and consider themselves moral and good as he reveals their sinful nature through their conscience (Rom 2:1-16). In Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20 Paul further broadens his definition of man’s depravity to include the Jew. He directly addresses the Jews as he uses the Law to convict them of their sins. In Rom 3:9-20 Paul draws his argument to a conclusion by stating that both Jews and Gentiles are both under sin. So, although the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God, these oracles only declare that all have sinned.
Thus, Paul proves in his arguments that man has rejected the three witnesses of God the Father. Mankind has rejected the witness of creation (Rom 1:18-32), the witness of his conscience (Rom 2:1-16), and the witness of the Law (Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20). He has rejected the physical testimony of creation, the testimony of his heart through his conscience, and the testimony of his understanding through the Law, which witnesses have testified to man’s spirit, soul and body (1Jn 5:19).
1Jn 5:19, “And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.”
Outline – Note the proposed outline:
1. The Depravity of the Heathen Rom 1:18-32
2. The Depravity of the Moral Man Rom 2:1-16
3. The Depravity of the Jew Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
God’s Call through the Mosaic Law: Testimony to Man’s Actions In Rom 1:18-32 Paul reveals man’s depravity and rejection of God. He then broadens his definition of depravity in Rom 2:1-16 by addressing those who condemn evil and consider themselves moral and good by showing their sinful nature. Now in Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20 Paul further broadens his definition of man’s depravity to include the Jew. Throughout this lengthy passage of Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20 Paul is attempting to explain how man’s sinful nature serves as a testimony of God’s righteousness in inflicting His wrath upon mankind from heaven (Rom 1:18), which is the underlying theme of this passage of Scripture.
In Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20 Paul turns to the Jews who justify themselves in the Law, which reveals man’s actions. Paul offers a more lengthy discussion about the depravity of the Jew than the Gentiles because they had been given the oracles of God and had been used under the old covenant to reveal God’s standard of justification to the world.The Jews, who observe the disgusting behavior of the heathen take comfort in their traditions and conservative lifestyles. Yet, they too are condemned by the very Law they serve. Paul first rehearses the multitude of boasts that the Jews make in their religious heritage (Rom 1:17-20). He then reveals that all such boasting is in vain as he exposes their hearts (Rom 2:21-24). He explains that true circumcision is that of the heart, and not of the flesh (Rom 2:25-29). He next explains to them the advantages of being a Jew (Rom 3:1-8). Paul then quotes from the Law (primarily Psalms and Isaiah) to reveal how God’s wrath has been placed upon them also. Paul uses the Law to reveal how everyone is in a state of sin, even the Jew. He directly addresses the Jews as he uses the Law to convict them of their sins (1Ti 1:8).
1Ti 1:8, “But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;”
Although the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God (Rom 3:1-8), these oracles only declare that all have sinned (Rom 3:9-20). He explains that all men, Jews and Gentiles, are under sin (Rom 3:9). They have a wicked heart (Rom 3:10-12), and speak wicked words from their minds (Rom 3:13-14), and commit deeds of wickedness with their bodies (Rom 3:15-17), because they have no fear of God in their hearts (Rom 3:18). The Law has simply served to reveal man’s sinful nature rather than justify him (Rom 3:19-20).
Outline – Here is a proposed outline:
1. The Jew Makes His Boast in God Rom 2:17-20
2. The Jew as a Sinner Rom 2:21-24
3. True Circumcision Rom 2:25-29
4. The Advantage of the Jews: God’s Oracles Rom 3:1-8
5. The Law has Declared Both Jews and Gentiles as Sinner Rom 3:9-20
A Summary of Paul’s Experience in Debating with the Jews – Rom 2:17 is a key verse to chapters 2 and 3 of Romans in that Paul presents argument of his Jewish opponents in a rhetorical manner and answers them. Paul had spent years in the Jewish synagogues debating with them on these points. It explains that the Jews were trusting in the Law and boasting in God. Paul’s conclusion to this attitude of the Jews is found in Rom 2:29. Paul says that being a Jew is of the heart and not in the circumcision of the flesh.
Rom 2:17, “Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,”
Rom 2:29, “But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.”
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Man’s Guilt and God’s Righteousness.
The advantage of the Jew:
v. 1. What advantage, then, hath the Jew, or what profit is there of circumcision?
v. 2. Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
v. 3. For what if some did not believe? Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
v. 4. God forbid! Yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That Thou mightest be justified in Thy sayings, and mightest overcome when Thou art judged. The apostle had last shown that the mere outward possession of the Law did not exempt the Jews from judgment and condemnation, since God demands a keeping of the Law and is not satisfied with a mere hearing; he had argued, furthermore, that circumcision in the flesh, though it be the seal of the covenant of God and the pledge of His promises, could be of value only if it was accompanied by a circumcision of the heart. But the Jewish reader might now answer that these statements were inconsistent with the acknowledged superiority and privileges of his nation. This objection the apostle here meets. In consequence of what has just been set forth: What, then, is the advantage, the preeminence, the superiority, of the Jew, or what is the benefit, the value, the profit, of circumcision? The two questions have the same thought, for by circumcision the descendant of Abraham became a member of the Jewish nation. The answer is: Much, in every way, in every respect. The superiority of the Jews was evident in all conditions of life. But Paul here mentions only the chief prerogative: First, the most outstanding and unmistakable advantage, because or that they have been entrusted with the oracles, the special sayings, of God, the revelations of God as included in the Old Testament writings, both Law and Gospel. By the deposit of this treasure in their midst God granted to the Jews a distinction above all other nations; He placed almost unlimited trust in them, and expected a proportional measure of faithfulness from them.
The apostle now finds it necessary to vindicate himself against a further possible objection: For what is the situation? If some were unfaithful, surely their unfaithfulness will not render the faithfulness of God inefficient! The Jews, the majority of the Jews, had been unfaithful; they had not shown the proper appreciation of, and reverence for, the divine revelations; they had not believed the promises of God. And therefore one might conclude that, since they had broken their trust and had not been obedient to the Law of God, God’s part of the covenant had also been annulled. But Paul answers with an emphatic: Indeed not! By no means! The very idea seems to the apostle to savor of blasphemy; the thought that the faith of God has been rendered inefficient, His trust has been withdrawn, is no fair inference from his teaching. There is “no breach of the promises of God involved in the condemnation of the wicked Jews. ” The situation rather is this: Let God be true, but every man a liar. God will always be found faithful in keeping His part of the covenant, and He must be seen and acknowledged as true. That will be the final result and consequence of the drift of matters: God will stand before the whole world as the Faithful One, that adhered strictly to His promises, but the Jews as liars, that have abandoned the Word of God. But Paul purposely speaks in general terms. All men, in comparison with God, in their relation toward God, are liars, Psa 116:11. To all of them God has revealed Himself, though not in the same degree; and all of them have turned from Him to vanity and lies. This statement the apostle substantiates with a Scripture-passage, Psa 51:4: In order that Thou mayest be justified in Thy sayings and overcome, remain victorious, when Thou art judged. In the final analysis, God will always be found just and truthful, the case will and must be decided in His favor, if not before, then most assuredly on, the last day. The evidence will demonstrate that God showed only kindness and mercy to men, but that they offended Him and broke the covenant of trust at all times. And so the very transgressions of men will serve to bring out the unchanging faithfulness of God all the more strongly. Note: The words of Paul in this instance should be the very strongest incentive to every Christian to prove faithful to Him at all times, and not to rely upon a mere conventional form of religious observation.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Rom 3:1-8
(2) Certain objections with regard to the Jews suggested and met. In this passage, before proceeding with his argument, the apostle meets certain objections that might be made to what has been so far said. Some difficulty in determining his exact meaning arises from the concise and pregnant form in which the objections are put and answered, and from fresh ones arising out of the answers, which have also to be met. The objections are from the Jewish standpoint, though not put into the mouth of an objecting Jew, but rather suggested as likely ones by St. Paul himself. To the original readers of the Epistle, who were familiar with the tone of Jewish thought, the sequence of the ideas would probably be more obvious than to us. Reserving special consideration of successive clauses for our exposition of each verse, we may, in the first place, exhibit thus the general drift.
Objection 1 (Rom 3:1). If being a Jew, if circumcision itself, gives one no advantage over the Gentile, what was the use of the old covenant at all? It is thus shown to have been illusory; and God’s own truth and faithfulness are impugned, if he is supposed to have given, as conveying advantages, what really conveyed none. (This last thought, though not expressed, must be supposed to be implied in the objection, since it is replied to in the answer.)
Answer (Rom 3:2-4).
(1) It was not illusory; it did convey great advantages in the way of privilege and opportunity; this advantage first, not to mention other. that “the oracles of God” were entrusted to the Jew. And
(2) if some (more or fewer, it matters not) have failed to realize these advantages, it has been their fault, not God’s. It is man’s unfaithfulness, not his, that has been the cause of the failure. Nay, though, according to the hasty saying of the psalmist, all men were false, God’s truth remains; nay, further, as is expressed in another psalm (Psa 51:1-19.), man’s very unfaithfulness is found to commend his faithfulness the more, and redound to his greater glory.
Objection 2 (Rom 3:5). Based on the last assertion. But if man’s unfaithfulness has this result, how can God, consistently with his justice, be wrath with us and punish us for it? Surely the Jew (whose case we are now considering) may claim exemption from “the wrath” of God spoken of above, his unfaithfulness being allowed to have served only to establish God’s truth and to enhance his glory.
Answer (Rom 3:6-8). I have suggested this objection as though the matter could be regarded from a mere human point of view, as though it were one between man and man; for it is true that a man cannot justly take vengeance on another who has not really harmed him. But such a view is inapplicable to God in his dealings with man; it does not touch our doctrine of his righteous wrath against sin as such. I can only meet it with a . For
(1) it would preclude God from judging the world at all, as we all believe he will do. Any heathen sinner might put in the same plea, saying, Why am I too () judged as a sinner? Nay,
(2) since it involves the principle of sin being evil, not in itself, but only with regard to its consequences, it would, if carried out, justify the odious view (which we Christians are by some falsely accused of holding) that we may do evil that good may come.
Rom 3:1, Rom 3:2
What advantage then hath the Jew! or what is the profit of circumcision! Much (, a neuter adjective, agreeing with ) every way (not by all means; the meaning is that in all respects the position of the Jew is an advantageous one): first (rather than chiefly, as in the Authorized Version. One point of advantage is specified, which might have been followed by a secondly and a thirdly, etc. But the writer stops here, the mention of this first being sufficient for his purpose. Others are enumerated, so as to elucidate the purport of , in Rom 9:4, Rom 9:5) for that they (the Jews) were entrusted with the oracles of God. The word (always used in the plural in the New Testament) occurs also in Act 7:38; Heb 5:12; 1Pe 4:11. Of these passages the most apposite is Act 7:38, where the Divine communications to Moses on Mount Sinai are spoken of as (cf. Num 24:4, Num 24:16, where Balaam speaks of himself as ). Some (as Meyer), in view of the supposed, reference in the following verse to the Jews rejection of the gospel, take the word here to mean especially the revealed promises of the Redeemer. But neither the word itself nor its use elsewhere suggests any such limited meaning; nor does the context really require it. It may denote generally the Divine revelations of the Old Testament, which, for the eventual benefit of mankind, had been entrusted exclusively to the Jews.
Rom 3:3
For what if some (. The expression does net denote whether many or few; it only avoids assertion of universality of unbelief (cf. Rom 11:17; 1Co 10:7), though it is implied in the following verso that, even if it had been universal, the argument would stand) did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? Alford renders “were unfaithful,” taking it in the sense of being “unfaithful to the covenant, the very condition of which was to walk in the ways of the Lord, and observe his statutes;” and this on the ground that the apostle is not as yet speaking of faith or the want of it, but, in accordance with the idea of the preceding chapter, of (Rom 3:5) and moral guilt. But the meaning of words must not be forced to meet the views of interpreters; and we observe that and are ever elsewhere used in their proper sense to denote want of faith. Still, it is to be observed that in the passage before us in man is opposed to in God, so as to suggest a more general sense of than mere unbelief. In view of this opposition, we may adopt the rendering of the whole passage in the Revised Version: “What if some were without faith? Shall their want of faith,” etc.? Meyer and others, understanding (as said above) by the Divine oracles which were prophetic of Christ, refer exclusively to the disbelief in him on the part of the majority of the Jews at the time of writing. But the aorist tense of the verb, as well as the context, is against the idea of such reference, at any rate exclusively. The context, both in Rom 2:1-29. and the latter part of this chapter after Rom 2:9, certainly suggests rather reference to the failure of the Jews throughout their history to realize the advantage of their privileged position; and this failure might properly be attributed to their want of faith, to the (Heb 3:12), cf. Heb 3:19; Heb 4:2, together with Rom 4:11. in these passages is regarded as the root of . On the other hand, the whole drift of Rom 11:1-36. in this Epistlewhere the present of the chosen people shown in their rejection of the gospel is spoken of as not hindering, but furthering, the righteous purpose of God, and redounding in the end to his glorysuggests a like reference here. And it may have been in the apostle’s mind, though, for the reasons above given, it can hardly be the only one in the passage before us.
Rom 3:4
God forbid (there is no better English phrase for expressing the indignant repudiation of ): yea, let God be true ( ; i.e. “let his truth be established;” “Fiat, in judicio,” Bengel), but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged, We can hardly avoid recognizing a reference to Psa 116:11 in “every man a liar, the words of the LXX. being exactly given, though the general purport of that psalm does not bear upon the present argument. The apostle takes this phrase from it as expressing well what he wants to say, viz. that though all men were false (in the sense expressed and implied by the previous ), yet God’s truth stands. But it only leads up to the second quotation from Psa 51:1-19., which is the important one, introduced by . In its final words, , the LXX. is followed (so also Vulgate, cum judicaris), though the Hebrew may be more correctly rendered, as in the Authorized Version, “be clear when thou judgest.” The of the LXX. may be understood passively in the sense of God being called to account, as men might be, for the justice of his dealings; or, perhaps, in a middle sense for entering into a suit or controversy with his people. means “going to law” in 1Co 6:1, 1Co 6:6 (cf. also Mat 5:40), and in the LXX., with especial reference to a supposed controversy or pleading of God with men, Jer 25:31; Job 9:2; Job 13:19. (See also Hos 2:2, .) The meaning of this concluding expression does not, however, affect the main purport of the verse, or its relevancy as here quoted. Occurring in what is believed to be David’s penitential psalm after his sin. in the matter of Uriah, it declares, in conjunction with the preceding verse, that, sin having been committed, man alone is guilty, and that God’s truth and righteousness can never be impugned. But it seems to imply still more than this, viz. that man’s sin has the establishment of God’s righteousness as its consequence, or even, it may be, as its purpose; for the conclusion of Job 13:4 in the psalm, naturally connected with “against thee only have I sinned” preceding, is so connected by (in Hebrew, ); and it is not out of keeping with scriptural doctrine that David should have intended to express even Divine purpose in that he had been permitted, for his sins, to fall into that deeper sin with the view of establishing God’s righteousness all the more. It does not, however, seem certain that the conjunction need of necessity be understood as relic; it may be embatic only. However this be, it is the inference from that suggests the new objection of the following verse.
Rom 3:5, Rom 3:6
But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall We say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (so the Authorized Version; rather, brings the wrath upon us ( ), with reference to the Divine wrath against sin, spoken of above). I speak after the manner of men. God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world! The purport of this reply appears sufficiently in the paraphrase given above. But the intended Bearing on the argument of Rom 3:7 is not at once apparent.
Rom 3:7
For if the truth of God in my lie abounded to his glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? One view is that this is a continuation or resumption of the question of Rom 3:5 on the part of the Jew, its drift being the same. But the word , as well as the position of the verse after , etc., suggests rather its being intended to express that any one throughout the world, as well as the Jew, might plead against’ deserved judgment, if the Jew’s supposed plea were valid. Nay, in that case, the apostle goes on to say, he, or any of us, might justify all wrongdoing for a supposed good end. Why not?
Rom 3:8
And not (i.e. why should we not say), as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say, Let us do evil, that good may come? Whose (i.e. of those who do say so) condemnation is just.
Rom 3:9-20
(3) The testimony of the Old Testament to human sinfulness. Objections having been thus raised and met, the apostle now confirms his position, that all mankind, Jew as well as Gentile, are under sin, by adducing the Scriptures of the Jews themselves.
Rom 3:9
What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved (or, charged, as in the Vulgate, causati sumus) both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin. The meaning of the first part of this verse has been much discussed. We may observe:
(1) seems to be rightly separated (as in Authorized Version) from because of the form of the answer to the question, : after ; we should expect .
(2) The Jews, with whom St. Paul identifies himself, must be supposed to put the question; not the Gentiles, as some have supposed. For there is nothing in the context to suggest the Gentiles as the speakers, nor does what follow suit the supposition.
(3) The main question is as to the sense of , which occurs here only in the New Testament, and has, therefore, to be interpreted from consideration of the sense of which the verb is capable, and the probable drift of the argument. Some have taken it as a passive verb, with the meaning, “Are we surpassed?” i.e. are we Jews in worse case than the Gentiles on account of our greater privileges? The active verb, , in the sense of “to excel,” being both transitive and intransitive, its passive may be used in the same sense. An instance quoted in commentaries is (Plut., ‘Mor.,’), “cum Jove minores non sint.” So the recent Revisers, though dissented from by the American Committee. The strong objection to this interpretation is that there has been nothing so far even to suggest any superiority of the Gentile to the Jew, and that what follows does not bear upon any such idea. Thus to interpret would be to sacrifice the sense to supposed grammatical exigence, which, after all, is uncertain. Taking, then, as the middle voice, we have two interpretations before us; either, with Meyer, to render, Do we put forward (anything) in our defence?which he maintains (though not conclusively) to be the only proper sense of the middle verbor (as in the Authorized Version), Are we better (i.e. in better ease) than they? This rendering, though it gives essentially the same sense as if (intransitive) had been written, is commended by its suitableness to the course of argument, and the middle voice may, perhaps, he accounted for as denoting the Jews’ supposed claim of superiority for themselves. Thus the connection of thought is plain. The conclusion of Rom 2:1-29. had left the Jews on the same footing with the Gentiles before God in respect of sinfulness. But then objections had been raised on the ground of the acknowledged privileges of the chosen people; and such objections have been met. The apostle now sums up the result: What, then, is the state of the case? Have we any advantage to allege? No, not at all in the sense intended; the previous argument stands; and he proceeds to confine his position from the testimony of the Old Testament itself.
Rom 3:10-18
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are altogether become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one (Psa 14:1-7. or 53.). Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they hays used deceit (Psa 5:9); the poison of asps is under their lips (Psa 140:3): whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness (Psa 10:7): their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known (Pro 1:16 and Isa 59:7): there is no fear of God before their eyes (Psa 36:1). These texts are from various unconnected passages of the Old Testament, quoted from the LXX., though not all accurately. They seem to be put together from memory by way of showing the general scriptural view of human depravity. It may be said that they do not establish the apostle’s position of all men being guilty; for that they are for the most part rhetorical rather than dogmatic, that most of them refer only to certain classes of men, and that the righteous are spoken of too, and this in the sequence of even the most sweeping of them all (that from Psa 14:1-7. or lift.), which does, literally understood, assert universal sinfulness. Any such objection to the cogency of the quotations may be met by regarding them as adduced, not as rigid proofs, but as only generally confirmatory of the apostle’s position. See, he would say to the Jew, the picture your own Scriptures give you; observe their continued testimony to human depravity: and the main point of all the quotations is that which is brought out in the next verse, viz. that they had reference, not to the Gentile world, but to the chosen people themselves.
Rom 3:19, Rom 3:20
Now we know that what things soever the Law ( here for the Old Testament generally as the embodiment and exponent of the Law) saith, it speaketh to them that are under the Law (not to the world outside, but to those within its own sphere): that every mouth (the Jew’s as well as the Gentile’s) may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Because by works of law ( here suitably without the article; see on Rom 2:13) shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for through law is knowledge of sin. In this concluding verse the apostle briefly intimates the reason of law’s inefficacy for justification, anticipating, after a manner usual with him, what is afterwards to be more fully set forth, as especially in Rom 7:1-25. The reason is that law in itself only defines sin and makes it sinful, but does not emancipate from it.
Rom 3:21-31
(4) The righteousness of God, manifested in Christ and apprehended by faith, is the sole remedy, and available for all. The position enunciated in Rom 1:18 being now sufficiently established, the apostle enters here on his main argument, announced in Rom 1:17.
Rom 3:21
But now the righteousness of God without law (i.e. apart from law) is (or, has been) manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the prophets. On the essential meaning of God’s righteousness ( ), see on Rom 1:17, and Introduction. This passage, in which the thesis of Rom 1:17 is formally enunciated, is consistent with this meaning; in confirmation of which observe Rom 1:25, Rom 1:26, where evidently means God’s own righteousness, as also above, Rom 1:5. If this view is correct, there is no need to follow commentators into their discussions of the significance of in supposed connection with the idea of man’s imputed righteousness; such as whether it is meant to declare justification through Christ to be without the aid of the Law”sine legis adminiculo” (Calvin)or to exclude all legal works, done before, or even after justification, from any share in the office of justification. However true these positions may be, what is said here seems simply to mean that God’s righteousness has been manifested in Christ in a different way, and on a different principle, from that of law. The principle of law is to enjoin and forbid, and to require complete obedience; but law, even as exhibited in the Divine Law of the Jews, has been shown to fail to enable man thus to attain to ; therefore, apart from this exacting principle, the righteousness of God is now revealed to man, embracing him in itself. The absence of the article before here, and its insertion in the latter clause of the same verse, where the Mosaic Law is definitely referred to, is fully explained by what has been said above under Rom 2:13. Being witnessed, etc., is introduced parenthetically by way of intimating that this manifestation of God’s righteousness, though “apart from law,” is not in any opposition to the teaching of the Law and the prophets, being, in fact, anticipated by them. The proof of this appears afterwards in Rom 4:1-25.
Rom 3:22
Even the righteousness of God through faith of Jesus Christ unto all (and upon all is added in the Textus Receptus, but ill supported) them that believe: for there is no distinction. We observe that the expression here used is not but simply . Thus does not naturally connect itself with as defining it, but rather with which follows, and perhaps with reference to the of Rom 3:21 understood. The idea, then, may be still that of God’s own righteousness, manifested in Christ, unto or towards all believers, who through faith apprehended it and became sharers in it. When St. Paul elsewhere speaks of the believer’s imputed righteousness, his language is different, so as to make his meaning plain. Thus Rom 4:6, ; Rom 5:17, ; Rom 9:30 ; Php 3:9, . What we contend for is simply thisthat the phrase means God’s own righteousness, which, manifested in the atoning Christ, embraces believers, so that to them too righteousness may be imputed (Rom 4:11).
Rom 3:23
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. The “glory of God,” of which all men are here said to come short (), has been taken to mean
(1) honour or praise from God. “Dei favore et approbatione carent” (Sehleusner). So decidedly Meyer, Tholuek, Alford, and others. In this case would be the gen. auctoris, which Meyer argues is probable from its being so in . This argument (which is not worth much in any case) tells the other way if, as we hold, it is not so in the latter phrase. For the New Testament use of in the sense of “praise” or “honour,” 1Th 2:6 is adduced ( ); also Joh 5:44 ( ); and especially Joh 12:43, where is, as here, followed by the genitive without any connecting preposition: (“the praise of God,” Authorized Version). But, even apart from the different, and in itself more obvious, meaning of the phrase, , where it occurs elsewhere, it is at least a question whether in the last cited passage it can be taken to mean praise or honour from God. It comes immediately after the quotation from Isa 6:9, etc., followed by “These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory ( ), and spoke of him.” Hence the meaning of Joh 12:43 may probably be that the persons spoken of loved mundane glory (cf. Mat 4:8; Mat 6:29) rather than the Divine glory, seen in the vision of faith, manifested to the world in Christ (cf. Joh 1:14, “We beheld his glory,” etc.), and “loved” by those who have not the eyes blinded and the heart hardened. So, even in the previous passage of St. John’s Gospel (Joh 5:41, Joh 5:44), may denote man’s participation in the Divine glory, rather than praise or honour, while may mean the mundane glory conferred by men on each ether. These considerations commend, in the passage before us, the interpretation
(2) “Significatur ipsius Dei viventis gloria, vitam tribuens (cf. Rom 6:4); ad quam homini, si non peccasset, patuit aditus: sod peccator ab illo fine sue excidit, neque jam eum assequitur, neque gloriam illam, quae in illo effulsisset, ullo mode tolerare potest: Heb 12:20, et seq.; Psa 68:2; quo fit ut morti sit obnoxius: nam gloria et immortalitas suut synonyma, et sic mors et corruptio. Absunt a gloria Dei, i.e. a summo fine homiuis aberrarunt. At justificati recuporant spom illius glorise. Vid. omnino c. Psa 5:2, Psa 5:11, 17; 8:30, etc.” (Bengel). Further, the sense which the same expression seems evidently to bear in Rom 5:2 of this Epistle is of importance for our determination of its meaning here. We are not justified in understanding, with some interpreters, any specific reference to the “image of God” (cf. 1Co 11:7, ) in which man was created, and which has been lost by the Fall, there being nothing to suggest it, or, with others, exclusively to the future glory, since the present seems to denote a present deficiency. The general conception appears sufficiently plain in Bengel’s exposition above given, according to which “the glory of God” means the glory of the Divine righteousness (“sempiterna ejus virtus et divinitas” Bengel on Heb 1:8), which man, through sin, falls short of.
Rom 3:24-26
Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood. agrees with in Rom 3:23. “Repente sic panditur scena amaenior” (Bengel). and are opposed to the impossible theory of justification by law. And, as all sinned, so all are so justified potentially, the redemption being for all; cf. especially Rom 5:18. But potential justification only is implied; for the condition for appropriation is further intimated by following. The means whereby it becomes objectively possible is “the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” Here, as throughout St. Paul’s Epistles, and in the New Testament generally, the doctrine of atonement being required for man’s justification is undoubtedly taught, Christ being viewed as not only manifesting God’s righteousness in his life, and reconciling believers through his influence on themselves, but as effecting such reconciliation by an atoning sacrifice. The word itself () here used may indeed sometimes denote deliverance only (cf. Rom 8:23; Luk 21:28; Eph 1:14; Eph 4:30; Heb 11:35); but certainly, when used of the redemption of man by Christ, it implies atonement by the payment of a ransom ( or ); cf. Eph 1:7; 1Co 6:20; Gal 3:13; 1Ti 2:6; Rev 5:9; Mat 20:28; the ransom paid being said to be himself, or (as in Mat 20:28) his life; . It does not follow that all conceptions of schools of theology as to how the atonement was efficacious for its purpose are correct or adequate. It must, from the very nature of the subject, remain to us a mystery. It may be enough for us to believe that whatever need the human conscience has ever felt of atonement for sin, whatever human want was expressed by world-wide rites of sacrifice, whatever especially was signified by the blood required for atonement in the Mosaic ritual,all this is met and fulfilled for us in Christ’s offering of himself, and that in him and through him we may now “come boldly to the throne of grace,” having need of no other in Mat 20:25 (“set forth,” Authorized Version), may bear here its most usual classical sense of exhibiting to view (“ante omniam oculos possuit,” Bengel); i.e. in the historical manifestation of the Redeemer. It may, however, mean “decreed,” or “purposed” (cf. Mat 1:13; Eph 1:9). The word seems best taken as a neuter adjective used substantively, there being no instance of its application in the masculine to a person. Its ordinary use in the LXX (as also Heb 9:5) is to designate the lid of the ark (i.e. the mercy-seat), the noun (which is added Exo 25:17; Exo 37:6) being supposed to be always understood, though the usual designation is simply . Hence most commentators, including the Greek Fathers generally, understood in this sense here, Christ being regarded as the antitype of the mercy-seat, as being the medium of atonement and approach to God. The main objection to this view is that it involves an awkward confusion of metaphors, it being difficult to regard him who was at once the Victim whose blood was offered, and the High Priest who offered his own blood, at the mercy-seat, as being also the Mercy-seat itself. (Thus, however, Theodoret explains: “The mercy-seat of old was itself bloodless, being without life, but it received the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrifice. But the Lord Christ and God is at once Mercy-seat, High Priest, and Lamb.”) The difficulty is avoided if we take the word here in the sense of propitiatory offering, which in itself it will bear, a noun, such as , being supposed to be (cf. 4 Maccabees 17:22; Josephus, ‘Ant.,’ 16. c. 7; Dio Chrys., ‘Orat.,’ 11.1). Whatever its exact meaning, it evidently denotes a true fulfilment in Christ of the atonement for sin undoubtedly signified by the type; as does further , which follows. For a distinct enunciation of the significance of bleed under the ancient ritual, as reserved for and expressing atonement, see especially Le Mat 17:11. The meaning of the whole sacrificial ritual is there expressed as being that the life of man being forfeit to Divine justice, blood, representing life, must be offered instead of his life for atonement. Hence, in pursuance of this idea, the frequent references in the New Testament to Hebrews physical blood-shedding of Christ (cf. Heb 9:22, “Without shedding of blood there is no remission”). It is not, however, implied that the material blood of Christ, shed on the cross, in itself cleanses the soul from sin, but only that it signifies to us the fulfilment in him of the type of an atoning sacrifice. As to the construction of verse 25, it is a question whether is to be taken in connection with , meaning “through faith in his blood” (an unusual expression, though grammatically correct, cf. Eph 1:15), or with . The emphatic position of , such as apparently to signify “in his own blood,” favours the latter connection (cf. Heb 9:12-25, where the offering of Christ is distinguished from those of the Law in being , not ). Thus the meaning will be that he was set forth (or purposed) as an , available for us through faith, and consisting in the offering of himselfin, the shedding of his own blood. For showing of his righteousness because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime in the forbearance of God, in order to the showing of his righteousness in the time that now is, so that he may be righteous, and justifying (the word is , corresponding with and preceding) him that is of faith in Jesus. This translation differs materially from that of the Authorized Version, which is evidently erroneous, especially in the rendering of by “for the remission.” Our translators, in a way very unusual with them, seem to have missed the drift of the passage, and so been led to give the above untenable rendering in order to suit their view of it. It is to be observed that two purposes of the setting forth (or purposing) of Christ Jesus as are here declared, both denoted by the word , which is repeated, being governed in the first clause of the sentence by , and in the second by . Some say that the preposition is changed with no intended difference of meaning. But it is not St. Paul’s way to use his prepositions carelessly. in the first clause may be taken to denote the immediate purpose of the propitiation, and in the second to have its proper significance of aim or direction, denoting a further intention and result, consequent on the first. The first purpose, denoted by , was the vindication of God’s righteousness with regard to the ages past, in that he had so long passed over, or left unvisited, the sins of mankind. The propitiation of Christ. at length set forth, showed that he had not been indifferent to these sins, though in his forbearance he had passed them over. Cf. Act 17:30, ; also Heb 9:15, where the death of Christ, as the Mediator of the new covenant, is said to have been “for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant,” the meaning and efficacy of the “death” being thus regarded, in the first place, as retrospective (cf. also Heb 9:26). But then there was a further grand purpose, expressed by the of the second clause that of providing a way of present justification for believers now, without derogation of the Divine righteousness. Such appears to be the meaning of this passage.
Rom 3:27
Where then is the boasting? (that of the Jew, referred to in Rom 2:1-29., of his superiority to the Gentile with regard to justification). It is excluded. By what manner of () law? Of works? Nay, but by the law of faith. Is it, then, here implied that the law of works would allow of boasting? Not so practically. But its theory would leave room for it, on the supposition of its conditions being fulfilled; it is a kind of law (observe 😉 which does not exclude it; for if a man could say, “I have fulfilled all the righteousness of the Law,” he would have something wherein to glory. But the principle of the law of faith, which has been shown to be the only one available for the justification of either Jew or Gentile, in itself excludes it. It will be observed that the strict sense of the word , hitherto preserved, is extended in . (For the various applications of which the word is capable, see especially Rom 7:1-25.)
Rom 3:28
For ( here, rather than , as in the Textus Receptus; though either reading rests on good authority, suits best the course of thought, as introducing a reason for the assertion of the previous verse) we reckon that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law; i.e. the law of works, as a principle of justification, is, in fact, according to our reckoning, nowhere. It is to be particularly observed that implies no antinomian doctrine, nor any opposition to James (Jas 2:14, etc.). Its reference is not at all to works required or not required from man for acceptance, but simply to the ground or principle of his justification.
Rom 3:29
Is God the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also. This verse is in support of the doctrine, already asserted, and pervading the Epistle, of justification through Christ being for all mankind alike without distinction or partiality; and it comes in here in pursuance of the thought of the preceding verse. In it justification was said to be by faith, and apart from works of law, and therefore in itself available for the Gentiles, who had no revealed law, as well as for the Jews, who had. And why should it not be so? Is not the God of the Jews their God too? Yes.
Rom 3:30
If indeed ( rather than , as in the Textus Receptus) God is one, who shall justify the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith. Here the unity of God is given as the reason of his being the God of the Gentiles as well as of the Jews. So also, 1Ti 2:5, is the reason why he wills all men to be saved. It is of importance to grasp St. Paul’s idea in his assertions of the unity of God. It is not that of numerical unity, but what may be called the unity of quality; i.e. not a mere assertion of monotheism as against polytheism, but that the one God is one and the same to all, comprehending all in the embrace of his own essential unity. God’s unity involved in St. Paul’s mind the idea of “One God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him” (1Co 8:6); “who made of one blood every nation of men” (Act 17:26); in whom we (all of us) “live and move and have our being” (Act 17:28). Thus exclusion of the Gentiles from the paternal embrace of the one God is incompatible with the very idea, so conceived, of his unity. In the latter part of this verse it is said that God will justify the circumcision , and the uncircumcision , the preposition being changed, and the second being preceded by the article. The difference is not of essential importance, “faith” being the emphatic word. But it is not unmeaning. expresses the principle of justification; , the medium through which it may be had. The Jew was already in a position for justification through the Law leading up to Christ. He had only to accept it as of faith, and not of works of law (verse 20). The Gentile must attain to it through faith; i.e. his faith in the gospel now revealed to him. , ” (Theodorus).
Rom 3:31
Do we then make law void through faith? God forbid: nay, we establish law. The question naturally arises after what has been said about justification being . Do we then make out our revealed Law, which we have accounted so holy and Divine, to be valueless? Or. rather, as the question is more generally put ( being without the article, and therefore translated as above), “Do we make of none effect the whole principle of law, embodied to us in our Divine Law? Regarded erroneously as a principle of justification, the apostle might have answered. “Yes, we do.” But any disparagement of it, regarded in its true light and as answering its real purpose, he meets with an indignant . On the contrary, he says, we establish it. Law means the declaration of righteousness, and requirement of conformity to it on the part of man. We establish this principle by our doctrine of the necessity of atonement for man’s defect. We put law on its true base, and so make it the more to stand () by showing its office to be, not to justifya position untenablebut to convince of sin, and so lead up to Christ (cf. Rom 7:12, etc.; Gal 3:24). In pursuance of this thought, the apostle, in the next chapter, shows that in the Old Testament itself it is faith, and not law, which is regarded as justifying; as, in the first place and notably, in the case of Abraham; thus proving the previous assertion in Rom 3:21, . In Rom 7:1-25. he treats the subject subjectively, analyzing the operation of law in the human soul, and so bringing out still more clearly its true meaning and purpose.
HOMILETICS
Rom 3:1, Rom 3:2
Prerogative.
The differences in men’s circumstances and advantages are great, and are altogether inexplicable by human wisdom. We may not, probably we cannot, in all things “justify the ways of God to men.” There is much in the inequality of the human lot that is perplexing to the reflective and sensitive mind, which we cannot reconcile with our belief in God’s perfect justice, and his omnipotent and universal rule. This, however, is an insufficient reason for doubting the conviction of our moral nature, for questioning the declarations of Scripture, that the Judge of all the earth doeth right.
I. IT IS POSSIBLE TO OVERESTIMATE THE ADVANTAGE OF PECULIAR PRIVILEGES. This was the case with many of the Jews, who relied upon ancestral, hereditary advantages, and who even believed that, as children of Abraham, they were certain of Divine favour and of eternal life. Just as many in human society lay stress absurdly great upon their family, the status they enjoy in consequence of hereditary title or wealth, so is it in religious life. Not a few, like the Jews, rely far too much upon the Church with which they are connected, the ministry by which they are served, the sacraments to which they are admitted, the opportunities of knowledge, fellowship, and service with which they are favoured, it is too often forgotten that these privileges are only means to an end, and that the right and reasonable use of the means is necessary in order to the desired end.
II. IT IS POSSIBLE TO DISPARAGE ADVANTAGES WHICH, IT IS DISCOVERED, HAVE BEEN OVERVALUED. It is a tendency of human nature to fly from one extreme to the other. St. Paul supposes some reader, convinced by what he has said of the possibility of gaining no benefit by advantages enjoyed, to turn completely round and to ask what advantages accrue to those who enjoy what seem to be remarkable privileges. “What advantage, then, hath the Jew? or what is the profit of circumcision?” And it is still, no doubt, often the case that men, convinced that it is vain to rely upon their religious privileges, question whether they are in any better position for possessing such privileges. Social advantages are so evidently serviceable, that men suppose the same must be the case with religious advantages; and when they find that the possession of these last is compatible with censure and condemnation, they are apt to turn round, and to say, “Better to be without privileges which may lead to nothing!” Yet this is an unreasonable way of regarding such matters. For
III. IT IS POSSIBLE SO TO USE RELIGIOUS ADVANTAGES AS TO MAKE THEM THE MEANS TO SPIRITUAL GOOD. The apostle points out that the Jew occupied a position peculiarly favourable. “First of all, because they were entrusted with the oracles of God.” This was evidently a sacred prerogative, and there were many of the favoured nation who made so good a use of their opportunities that they became, not only intelligently acquainted with Divine truth, but penetrated by the Divine Spirit, and consecrated to the Divine service. Similarly, although the possession of the Scriptures and the privileges of the Christian Church will be occasion of condemnation to those hearers of the gospel who are negligent, unbelieving, and impenitent; on the other hand, these will be means of grace, and they actually are such, to all who use such opportunities of knowledge, fellowship, and improvement in a right spirit and method. There is obvious justice in this arrangement; the greater the privilege, the greater the responsibility. “To whom much is given, of him much will be required.” Those who are “entrusted with the oracles of God” may well be summoned seriously to consider what is becoming on the part of those so favoured, and diligently to use opportunities so precious, privileges and prerogatives so momentous and so unparalleled.
Rom 3:19, Rom 3:20
The purpose of Law.
Although it is the main intention of the apostle, in speaking of the Law, to show its insufficiency for the purpose with which its introduction and publication were commonly credited, his teaching would be misunderstood were he supposed to disparage it; for St. Paul held the Law of God in the highest reverence, although he did not attribute to it all with which it was connected in the mind of the unchristian Jew.
I. THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE LAW. This was unquestionably the revelation of the Divine character, attributes, and will. God is not only the perfectly holy Being; he is also the perfectly righteous Ruler. Truth declares what he is; Law declares what he will have his subjects to be. Accordingly, revelation takes the form, not only of the indicative, but of the imperative. Law is the expression of God’s justice, and of his will that all the subjects of his moral government should partake of his holiness, and, in their relations to one another and to him, should do those things that please him. His commandments, statutes, ordinances, are the utterance of his judgment as to what is good, what is best, for his intelligent creatures.
II. THE SECONDARY PURPOSE OF THE LAW. It is upon this that the inspired apostle lays stress in the passage now before us.
1. The Law reveals sin. It is a standard beside which the deficiencies and errors of men’s conduct become plainly manifest.
2. The Law condemns the sinner. It is not simply a declaration of what is right; it exposes and censures what is wrong. It speaks the sentence against the violators of its rules.
3. The Law silences the sinner. It leaves him without justification, apology, or excuse.
III. THE ULTIMATE PURPOSE OF THE LAW. This is unquestionably, in the case of our humanity, to prepare the way for the gospel. The Law is the pedagogue, the slave who attends and conducts the pupil, and it leads unto Christ. “By the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified in God’s sight.” Yet we cannot believe that a merciful God publishes the Law simply for the condemnation of men. It does reveal the heinousness of sin, making it appear exceedingly sinful. It does reveal the helplessness of the sinner. But all this is preparatory to a remedial and redemptive intervention. What the Law could not do, God does by the gift of his Son, who obeyed and magnified the Law in his own Person, and at the same time secured for sinful men, upon compliance with the conditions of faith and repentance, their exemption from the Law’s penalties, and their enjoyment of the Divine favour, participation in the Divine nature and life, and inheritance in the Divine and eternal blessedness. Thus that which appeared the instrument of wrath has been converted into the occasion of salvation.
Rom 3:22
The distinctively Christian righteousness.
The apostle has clearly shown that righteousness by the Law is not possessed by men, and that in this way is no hope for the salvation of the human race. Such is the negative conclusion to which facts and reason compel him. Yet it is not his vocation to preach a doctrine of despair. True, without righteousness there can be no salvation. Therefore, if light is to be cast upon human darkness, it must come else whither than from the Law. So it is that St. Paul preaches the new and distinctively Christian righteousness, to be secured by conditions that may be fulfilled by men of every racea righteousness that avails before God, and ensures the acceptance and the spiritual welfare and elevation of men.
I. THE CHARACTER AND DESIGNATION OF THIS RIGHTEOUSNESS: IT IS OF GOD, OR DIVINE.
1. It has its source in God. In this it is distinguished from the rectitude which is “by works;” that in a sense is of human origin. It is shown to be “of grace,” i.e. to be the provision of Divine favour, free and undeserved. And further, this expression, “of God,” implies the perfection of this righteousness in comparison with all beside.
2. It is divinely adapted by God to man. There is presupposition of man’s helplessness and dependence; it is presumedwhich is indeed the factthat man cannot work out a righteousness of his own. Hence there is a ground for this new righteousness in a Divine provision of substitution. The apostle would be misunderstood were his teaching upon this point to be interpreted, as some have interpreted it, as representing God as indifferent to the person by whom suffering is endured and obedience rendered. Yet Christ, by his suffering the consequences of sin in this humanity and by his perfect obedience and holiness, has laid the foundation for the acquisition by man of the distinctively Christian righteousness.
3. It avails and is acceptable before God. According to the representations of the context, it consists in the remission of sins, and acquittal and acceptance before the Divine tribunal, and in the manifestation of positive Divine approval; which may be regarded as the two parts of “justification.” It is evident that such righteousness is imputed, and not inherenta theological expression which must not, however, be interpreted to imply its unreality. Thus the Divinity of the Christian righteousness may be made apparent, as an object of admiration and of aspiration.
II. THE MEANS OF THE ATTAINMENT OF THIS RIGHTEOUSNESSTHROUGH FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST. In order to the fulfilment of this condition upon which the Christian righteousness may he attained, there must be:
1. Belief in the Scripture testimony concerning Christ, that he is the Son of God and the appointed Saviour of mankind. This is indispensable; for faith is not a vague sentimentit has an Object, and an Object which justifies and deserves it. Yet, though indispensable, this is not sufficient. There must be also:
2. Trust or confidence in Christ as a personal Saviour. Faith is not merely intellectual assent; it is the consent of the heart and the will. It is capable of degree, and there is strong faith and weak faith. But the important point is that the soul, in the attitude and exercise of faith, is brought into personal relation with the holy Saviour.
III. THE UNIVERSALITY OF THIS RIGHTEOUSNESS: IT IS UNTO ALL, AND UPON ALL, THEM THAT BELIEVE. The rectitude itself is a possession which men may share, whatever their nationality, their condition in life, their individual history. And the condition of its attainment is equally universal; there is nothing in faith which limits its exercise to any special members, or any section of the human race. In this Christianity proves itself to beand this is its glory, its Divinitythe universal religion.
HOMILIES BY C.H. IRWIN
Rom 3:1-8
The difficulties of Divine revelation, Jewish unbelief, and Divine justice.
The apostle, in the two preceding chapters, has now shown that both Jews and Gentiles stand on the same platform as regards their need of a Saviour. Both are alike sinners in God’s sight. The Gentile, who has not the Law, if he does by nature the things contained in the Law, will be justified before God. “Shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?” (Rom 2:14, Rom 2:26). The Jew’s circumcision will profit him if it be a religion that affects the heart and the spirit (Rom 2:29). St. Paul, so quick to see the bearings of every statement, notices at once that a difficulty naturally arises here, and he is prompt to meet it. “What advantage, then, hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?”
I. THE DIVINE REVELATION A GREAT PRIVILEGE. Notwithstanding all that had been said about the sins and shortcomings of the Jews, the Jews were still a privileged people. Nothing could ever destroy the fact that they were the chosen people of God, the people chosen to be the channel of God’s revelation to the world by the patriarchs and lawgivers and prophets, chosen also to be the channel through which the Divine Word become flesh and tabernacled among men”of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came.” The chief privilege which Paul mentions here was that “unto them were committed the oracles of God” (Rom 3:2). It is an advantage to have a Divine revelation entrusted to us. The possession and knowledge of God’s Word is a privilege not to be despised or lightly esteemed. There are degrees of nearness to the kingdom of God. While the gospel is “the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth,” while there are such events as sudden conversions, yet there are some who are in a more favourable condition for receiving the gospel than others. St. Paul, though he was suddenly converted, bad a long and thorough training previously in the Word of God. The scribe who came to Christ, and whom the Saviour pronounced to be “not far from the kingdom of God,” was one who had a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures, and who had been living a life of obedience to the Law of God. Such men were certainly more likely to be influenced by the personal power of Christ than those who had no previous knowledge of Divine truth. God works by miracles; but his ordinary method is to work by means. In these days of sensational evangelism it is well that we should not undervalue the importance of a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. Paul wrote to Timothy, “From a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” They who are well instructed in the Holy Scriptures are, as a rule, more likely to become true and permanent Christians than those who, under the influence of sudden excitement or emotion, without any previous religious knowledge, profess their readiness to follow the banner of Jesus. There are exceptions, but this would seem to be the rule. And those who are so highly privileged incur a serious and solemn responsibility. If unto us are committed the oracles of God, if we have the Bible in our hands and its truths treasured up in our minds, terrible indeed will be our guilt if we disobey its precepts, reject its invitations, and neglect its warnings. “To whom much is given, of them shall much be required.”
II. DIVINE FAITHFULNESS NOT AFFECTED BY HUMAN UNBELIEF. “For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God of none effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged” (Rom 3:3, Rom 3:4). The promises of God will be fulfilled, even though there are some who do not believe on them. The Law of God will assert its claims, even though there are some who repudiate them. It will not save men from the punishment of their sin that they did not believe God’s Word when it says, “Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” God’s faithfulness is not affected by the unbelief of his own people. Some persons argue against the Bible because of the unbelief of those who profess to regard it as their guide. They argue against Christianity because of the inconsistencies of its professors. The argument is false. Christianity is to be judged by its own teachings and spirit, and not by the imperfect way in which even its professors have received and practised them. Christianity is the life and teaching of Jesus Christ, combined with the influence of his death upon the cross. No inconsistency of professing followers can ever mar the beauty and sinlessness of that perfect Example. No unbelief can ever do away with the inherent power that is in the cross of Jesus to save sinners. The preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but to them that are saved it is the power of God and the wisdom of God.
III. DIVINE JUSTICE IS NOT AFFECTED BY THE CONSEQUENCES OF HUMAN SIN. “But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man.) God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?” (Rom 3:5, Rom 3:6).
1. God judges not consequences, but character. He looks at the heart and at the motives. The Jews’ unbelief was overruled by God for his own wise and gracious purposes. He brought good out of evil. But that did not make their unbelief the less guilty. In the eyes of the law, the guilt of a fraudulent person is not always estimated by the consequences of his acts. A man may forge his employer’s signature to cheques; but the employer may receive such information as will enable him to stop the cheques in time, and prevent the loss which would otherwise have resulted. But the forger’s guilt is not diminished because the consequences of his acts have been overruled. The law is not considered unfair or unrighteous if it punishes him, though his employer may not have suffered one penny of pecuniary loss. And even though the criminal’s conduct served in some way to bring out more clearly the integrity or kindness of his employer, yet even this would not be regarded as any mitigating circumstance in his guilt. So it is right that I should still be judged as a sinner, even though the truth of God hath abounded through my lie unto his glory (Rom 3:7).
2. Man is not justified in using sinful means to gain a good end. From the fact that God overrules sinful actions for his own glory and the good of humanity, it might appear to be a natural inference that it matters not what the morality of the action itself is so long as its object or result is good. “Let us do evil, that good may come” (Rom 3:8). Stated in this broad way, the immorality of the principle is apparent. And yet it is a principle which is too commonly acted upon. If you oppose some method of raising money for religious or charitable purposes, you will be constantly told, “Oh! it is for a good purpose.” That is, simply, it does not matter how you get the money so as you get it. It does not matter what the means are so long as the end is good. Now, it is time that the Christian Church and Christian teachers should set themselves resolutely against such demoralizing ideas. How can the Christian Church rebuke the dishonest practices too common in the commercial world, money-making by unfair or questionable methods, so long as its own hands are not clean, so long as almost any method of making money is considered justifiable if it is in connection with a Church bazaar? The end does not justify the means. Let us not do evil, that good may come.C.H.I.
Rom 3:9-18
Total depravity of human nature.
Here we have a dark picture of human nature in its fallen and unregenerate state. (The Bible view of human nature is more fully enlarged on below, on Rom 3:21-26.) Here the apostle, as it were, calls up before him the different parts of human nature, and obtains from each of them an admission and an evidence of the moral corruption with which they are tainted.
“My conscience hath a thousand several tongues,
And every tongue brings in a different tale,
And every tale convicts me for a villain.
All several sins, all used in each degree,
Throng to the bar, crying allGuilty! guilty!”
I. A DEPRAVED HEART. “There is no fear of God before their eyes” (Rom 3:18). There is no motive-power to regulate the life. There is no reverence for God’s Law within their spirit. There is no fear of offending the great Judge. There is no filial fear of grieving the heavenly Father. The conscience and heart have become seared and blunted. Remove the fear of God from heart and conscience, and what influence remains to check evil passions and to resist the insidious allurements of temptation? “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding.”
II. A DEPRAVED UNDERSTANDING. “There is none that understandeth” (Rom 3:11). It is fashionable in some circles to speak as if it was a sign of weak intellect to be a Christian, to believe in the Bible, or to regard with reverence the Law of God. Yet assuredly it may be claimed without any presumption or prejudice that there has been at least as much of the world’s best intellect arrayed on the side of Christianity as on the side of its opponents. If there be credulity anywhere, there is credulity displayed in accepting as scientific truths what very often are pure speculations. If there is weakness anywhere, it would seem to be in disregarding the evidence in nature that points to a great personal and intelligent First Cause, or the evidence in history that points to a wise and overruling Providence. “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.” It is sin, and not godliness, that is the evidence of a weak and depraved understanding.
III. A DEPRAVED WILL. “There is none that seeketh after God” (Rom 3:11). Nowhere is the depravity of human nature more painfully shown than in the exercise of the human will. How many deliberately choose evil rather than good! How many, with the experience of others to warn them, deliberately choose impurity rather than purity, intemperance rather than temperance! Life and death are put before them, yet they deliberately choose death. They reject the highest ideal of character, and follow poor and weak and wicked examples. They reject the inspiring hope of heaven and immortality, and only live for worldly pleasure or for worldly gain. They reject the fountain of living water, and seek out for themselves broken cisterns that can hold no water. To all such God appeals, in mercy, to make a right exercise of their will. “Turn ye, turn ye; for why will ye die?”
IV. DEPRAVED SPEECH.
1. Untruthfulness. “With their tongues they have used deceit” (Rom 3:13). Truth is essential to the well-being and happiness of society, to the very existence of commercial dealings. Yet how many there are who “use deceit” as a means of obtaining advantage or profit in business, as a means of obtaining some desirable object of their ambition! We have society deceitfulness, commercial deceitfulness, political deceitfulness. Against all such deceit the Bible sets itself. “Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour; for we are members one of another.”
2. Slander. “The poison of asps is under their lips” (Rom 3:13). The sin of evil-speaking is a very widespread one, and it hardly receives sufficient discouragement from Christian people. Men and women who would shrink from doing their neighbour a bodily injury, who would be shocked at the idea of taking his property dishonestly, think it no harm to injure his character and reputation. “The poison of asps is under their lips.” “O my soul, come not thou into their secret; unto their assembly, mine honour, be not thou united.”
3. Profanity. “Whose mouth is full of cursing” (Rom 3:14). Here is a widespread evil of the present day. Everywhere one hears the profane use of the sacred Name. Just as the suicide acts
“As if the Everlasting had not fixed
His canon ‘gainst self-slaughter,”
the profane person acts as if it had not been written with the finger of God, “The Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his Name in vain.”
V. DEPRAVED LIFE. “Their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known” (Rom 3:15-17). What a sad but true description of human life in its unregenerate and unchristianized condition! It is but the ordinary picture of what heathen nations were before the gospel entered into them. And where large communities throw off the restraints of religion, is it not what may be witnessed still, even in professedly Christian nations? Where there is no fear of the Law of God, there will be little fear of the law of man. Let the heart and conscience be godless; let the reason and understanding fail to respond to the claims of the Divine Being and of his moral Law; let the will cease to be influenced by heavenly and upward motives; let men in their common speech be accustomed to speak lightly of sacred things and of their neighbour’s character and reputation; and the step is but a short one to the disregard of human life and the disregard of human virtue. The nation that ceases to be influenced by the fear of God has entered on the broad way to its own corruption and decay.C.H.I.
Rom 3:21-26
“No difference.”
The Bible presents us with three pictures of man’s condition and character. They are very different, and yet they are all true pictures. There is the picture of man before the Fall, as he walked with God in primeval innocence of heart and sinless purity of life. There is the picture of man after the Fall, with the Divine image marred and stained by sin. And then there is the picture of man renewed againman an object of Divine mercy, man a subject of Divine grace, man prepared for sharing once more the Divine glory. Two of these views of human nature concern man as he is now. The one humbles, the other exalts him. On the one hand, man is put before us as he is by naturefallen, sinful, lost. On the other hand, he is put before us as God wants him to be, and as God has done all he can to make hima pardoned sinner, a holy character, an heir of everlasting life. These two views are brought together in these verses. The apostle speaks of the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe (Rom 3:21, Rom 3:22). And then he adds, as a reason for this broad, all-embracing statement, “For there is no difference: for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:22, Rom 3:23). There is no difference as to the fact of universal sin. And there is no difference as to the fact of universal mercy: “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (Rom 3:24). There is no difference as to the need of salvation. There is no difference in the way of salvation. Christ is the Saviour of all men who come to him in faith.
I. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THE FACT OF UNIVERSAL GUILT. “All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” This is not a mere cynical statement. The Bible is not a cynical book. It does not look down with contempt upon human nature. But it deals with facts as they are. And yet, if it speaks of human nature as sinful, it is in terms of pity and compassion and desire to save. You will often meet with cynical views of human nature. You will meet some who will tell you that all men are equally bad, or that one man is as good as another. You will meet some who will sneer at the idea of virtue, or unselfishness, or honesty being found in any one. They will tell you that no such thing exists. They will tell you that selfishness is the ruling principle of human nature, and that, if men or women are honest, or virtuous, or charitable, it is because it is their interest to be so. Now, it will generally be found that those who speak thus of human nature have not a very high moral character of their own. They judge others from their own standpoint. They look at everything from a selfish point of view, and they think that every one else does the same. But this is not the way in which the Bible speaks of human nature. It paints it very black, it is truebecause it paints it in its true colours. But it speaks of human nature as it is, not to depreciate it, but to elevate it. Moreover, it allows for the good that is in human nature. It meets human nature half-way. It recognizes that there is sometimes even in the most fallen nature a desire for better things. It represents the poor prodigal as coming to himself and saying, “I will arise, and go to my Father.” Jesus says,” Him that cometh to me! will in no wise cast out.” The Bible is no cynical book. And yet it says that “all have sinned.” This does not mean that all are equally bad, that all have committed sins of the deepest dye. But it does mean just what is said, that all have sinnedthat there is sin in some degree in all, sin enough to condemn, to destroy. How humbling this is to human pride! And this was just how the apostle meant it. His whole desire in these opening chapters of Romans is to show the need of a Saviour, of a perfect righteousness. He first of all showed that the heathen needed a righteousness. Then, turning to the Jews, whom he knew so well, he saw at once their self-righteous spirit. They made their beast in the Law, and yet all the while they were transgressors of the Law. And so he proves that both Jews and Gentiles are all under sin (verse 9). “For there is no difference: for all have sinned.” It is amazing to see how one professing Christian can look down upon another, just because the other is of a humbler class in society or wears a poorer dress, when, if they were true Christians, they would remember that they are all sinners saved by grace. Yes; the Bible is a very democratic book. It teaches that God hath made of one blood all nations of men to dwell upon the face of the earth. It teaches that the rich and poor meet together, and that God is the Maker of them all. But it does not, like many democratic leaders, give the people a false idea of themselves. It does not say, as I once heard a popular speaker say in Glasgow, that “the democracy is always wise and true and just.” It places all men upon a common platform, as sinners in the sight of God. It says, “There is no difference: for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”
II. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THE OFFER OF UNIVERSAL MERCY. “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” It is when we come to look at the cross of Jesus that we can see how God looks at human nature. It was certainly no depreciation of human nature that caused the Son of God to come and die upon the cross. It was no desire to depreciate human nature that caused God to give “his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” Ah no! When we speak of the depravity of human nature, of the fall of man, of universal guilt and sinfulness, some persons would charge us with taking low views of human nature. They are Bible views, at any rate; and the cross of Jesus shows us that, if God looks upon human nature as fallen, he does not look upon it with contempt. No! He looks upon it with infinite compassion. He looks upon it with redeeming love. He looks upon it, helpless, sinful, fallen; and as he looks, he stretches down the hand of mercy to save, to save for ever! On the porch of an old house in England is this inscription cut in stone, “Dextram cadenti porrigo“ (“I stretch out my right hand to him that is falling”). That is just what God does. He stretches out the strong hand of mercy, and not only to him that is falling, but to him that is fallen. He does not exclude the profligate, or there would have been no place in the kingdom of heaven for St. Augustine or John Newton. He does not offer salvation only to his friends, or where would the Apostle Paul have been? There is no difference. “Whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” How, then, is this, that the guilty sinner is an object of Divine mercy? He is guilty, and yet God not merely pardons, but justifies him, declares him just. “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (verse 24). It is on account of what Jesus did and suffered that the sinner is accepted in God’s sight. This is to be remembered, that Jesus not only bore our punishment (which one human being might do for another), but he bore our guilt. “The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” It is thus that the sinner is looked upon as justified in God’s sight. Thus God’s righteousness is shown: “That he might be just, and the Justifier of him which believeth in Jesus” (verse 26). And hence there is no difference. It is no merit in man, no penances, no good works of his own, that obtain his justification, his salvation. It is free grace. It is the righteousness that is in Jesus Christ. What large-hearted charity, what universal brotherhood of Christians, this large view of God’s universal mercy ought to teach us! “The same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.” How this view of the universal mercy, the universal love of God, should break down all narrow views of creed and party and class! The day is long in coming, but surely, under the influence of this Christian gospel, it will come at last
“When man to man, the world o’er,
Shall brithers be for a’ that.”
Yet it is to be observed that there is a great difference in man’s treatment of this universal offer of mercy. Some accept the message. The goodness of God leads them to repentance. The love of Christ melts their hearts. Some reject this message. They put it away from them. They neglect it. They are too much occupied with other thingswith pleasure, money-making, and the like. Now, this difference in the way in which men receive the offer of salvation will make a vast difference in their condition throughout eternity. How could it be otherwise? If Christ died to save those who take him as their Saviour, it must be a sad but stern reality that those who do not believe on him must perish. There is no difference in the universal guilt. There is no difference in God’s universal offer of his mercy. But there is a difference in man’s treatment of this offer. And there will be an awful difference throughout eternity.C.H.I.
Rom 3:27-31. (with Jas 2:24)
Faith and works.
One of the most fruitful sources of discussion and strife among Christians has been the selection of particular passages of Scripture and building doctrines upon them, without at all considering what other passages of Scripture may have to say on the same subject. Truth is many-sided. Two views, which appear contradictory, may both be right. There may be an element of truth in both; and they may both be different sides of the same truth. The statements of Paul and James on the subject of justification are an instance of this. They appear at first sight contradictory, but they are in reality two sides of the same great truth. This great truth is justification by Jesus Christ. One side of this truth is found in the words of St. Paul, “A man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law” (verse 28); that is to say, faith in Jesus Christ is sufficient to justify a man in God’s sight. That is very true, says James, but let us be sure that we have a real faith. There is no real faith except works go along with it. Thus James brings out his side of the truth: “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” It is the exaggeration of this latter truth that mainly divides the Roman Catholic Church from the Protestant Church as a whole. This exaggeration was the immediate origin of the Reformation. Instead of teaching men to put their faith in Christ, the Church of Rome taught them to place their confidence in their own good works. By the performance of certain penances and mortifications merit was laid up for them in heaven. By the payment of certain sums of money absolution was obtained for past sins. Clearly this was very far from being the teaching of Scripture. Then Martin Luther arose, and, in words that soon rang throughout all Europe, proclaimed the doctrine of justification by faith. It was time that a check should be placed on the progress of error; that men should be taught to rest their hopes of salvation no longer on a priest, on works of merit, or on sums of money, but on the Lord Jesus Christ. On the other hand, the doctrine of justification by faith has been so much insisted on that there has sometimes been a neglect of good works. This error has not been committed by any Protestant Church as a whole, in its formal teaching at any rate, for all the reformed Churches have insisted on the necessity of good works and a holy life as the evidence and fruit of true faith. But there has been sometimes an undue attention to beliefs combined with an undue neglect of practice. It is a well-known fact that very often the persons who are most dogmatic in their assertion of certain doctrines, and most fierce in their denunciation of those who differ from them, are among the most irreligious and most godless persons in their parish. With them the belief is everything; the practice is nothing. But this is not Christianity. To believe certain doctrines is not true faith. If the life is not changed, it matters little what we believe. When a man says that he believes in Christ, meaning that he believes certain doctrines about him, and is confident that therefore he is justified and safe for ever, while at the same time he lives in the practice of sin, that man’s justification is very doubtful. It is important to keep before us the twofold meaning and influence of the doctrine of justification.
I. THE TEACHING OF ST. PAUL. “A man is justified by faith without the deeds of the Law.” We are to remember that Paul, in this Epistle, was writing to a Church largely composed of Christians of a Jewish origin. In the Christian Church at Rome there was, consequently, a considerable tendency to magnify the importance of good worksa tendency which was fostered by Judaizing teachers. It is easy to see, from many expressions in the Epistle, that Paul has Jewish Christians largely in his mind. He speaks, for instance, of “Abraham our father;” he deals with positions which were peculiarly Jewishas, for instance, the necessity of circumcision, and the exclusion of the Gentiles from the Church of God. “Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles?” (verse 29). It was natural, therefore, for the apostle to lay special emphasis on the necessity for faith in Christ. He wants to show that something more than good works was needed for justification. Abraham, it is true, was a good man; but the works he did would not have saved him, were it not for the faith that he exhibited. “Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.” We cannot be justified by our own deeds, says Paul, because our best deeds come far short of the standard of righteousness which the Law lays down. Our own deeds are powerless to justify us. We need the righteousness of Christ. If we take hold of that righteousness believingly, and trust in it, we are justified. We are justified by faith, is the clear teaching of the apostle. But does he therefore do away with good works? Certainly not. Most forcibly he himself repudiates such an idea. “Do we then make void the Law through faith?” he asks (verse 31). “God forbid: yea, we establish the Law.” That is to say, the necessity for good works, for holy life, is still as great as ever. So, also, in the sixth chapter he protests against the idea that any one who professed faith in Christ should continue in sin. If we are made free from the guilt of sin, because we have believed on Christ, then we have become the servants of righteousness (Rom 6:18). In the eighth chapter he brings out even more fully the duty of holy life. We are not to rest content in the assurance that there is no condemnation to us. There must be active life. The spirit is life because’ of righteousness, and through the Spirit we must mortify the deeds of the body. Hence we see that, by the faith which leads to justification, the apostle plainly means only such faith as directly results in good works. True justification implies sanctification.
II. THE TEACHING OF ST. JAMES. “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” From what we have seen of Paul’s teaching, it is clear that this statement, which at first sight appeared to contradict it, is really in harmony with it. The teaching of James is, in fact, the complement of the teaching of Paul. What St. Paul brings out in the sixth and eighth chapters of Romans, namely, the necessity of good works as the evidence and fruit of faith, that is the purport of the whole Epistle of St. James. James, noticing the inconsistency which prevailed in his time, and which still prevails in the Christian Church, between the profession of many Christians and their daily conduct, especially in regard to others, in very clear and forcible language calls attention to the necessary connection of faith with practice. A faith which does not influence practice is useless. It is dead. Such faith cannot save a man. It may be said that Abraham was justified by faith. That is true. But was his faith a mere belief in a particular doctrine, such as the mere belief in the existence of a God? No. Even the devils believe that; but it brings them no confidence, but rather fear. Something more than that is necessary, if we are to be sure that we have true faith, and that we are therefore justified. We must act. And so Abraham’s faith was a faith that included action. He offered Isaac his son upon the altar. Thus by works was faith made perfect. In this sense it is evident that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only (Jas 2:14-26).
To sum up: Paul shows the uselessness of works without faith; James shows the uselessness of faith without works. Both are agreed that Christ alone can deliver us from the condemnation which our sins deserve. Both are agreed that he who is truly conscious of this salvation will strive against sin; that he who believes that Christ can save him from the guilt of sin must believe also that Christ can save him from its power in his heart. Both are equally strong in insisting upon the uselessness of profession without practice. The two sides of this great truth both need to be strongly emphasized in our own day. On the one hand, the necessity for a living, personal faith in Jesus Christ alone, needs to be emphasized in opposition to the substitution of forms and ceremonies for the gospel. And, on the other hand, the necessity for a life of practical godliness needs to be emphasized where there is so much of barren professionorthodox belief, but fruitless and sometimes careless life.C.H.I.
HOMILIES BY T.F. LOCKYER
Rom 3:1-8
Religious advantages, their use and abuse.
If the Gentile and the Jew shall alike come under judgment according to their works, of what profit was the election of the Jew, and his endowment with spiritual privileges? This leads to the question of religious advantages, their use and abuse.
I. USE. The very name, “religious advantage,” which springs so readily to the lips, attests the profit of being a people called of God. This profit is manifold, and in the forefront stands the fact that they have the living utterances of God amongst them.
1. For themselves. Who shall estimate the strength and sanctity accruing to individual, domestic, and national life from the contact of that living will?
(1) Indirect advantageto vitalize morals, law, and the manifold civilization of a people. So the indirect advantages of Christianity.
(2) Direct advantagesthe infinite felicity of union with God.
2. For others. “Intrusted.” To grasp at our own good not the chiefest felicity of life. And the Jew was God’s chosen messenger to the nations. Oh, the honour! A nation of preachers, re-uttering the words of that living voice! But how sadly they had misconceived their calling!
II. ABUSE. Instead of heralding God’s will among the nations, they learned to hate all who were not of themselves; and, instead of embracing God’s will for themselves, they relied on mere knowledge, and lived in sin. Then were God’s words made void? was there no gospel for them? and, because of their unfaithfulness, were the Gentiles to be unsaved?
1. God’s truth in spite of man’s falseness. They resisted his will, but the will remained firm and strong; they neglected his promises, hut the promises remained faithful; they rejected his Christ, but he was nevertheless the Christ of the Jews and of all the world. Over against their unholy conduct the holiness of God shone spotless and supreme.
2. God’s truth through man’s falseness. If man will not yield to God, God will make even man’s disobedience ministrant to his own purposes. So they rejected the Christ; and his death was the world’s life. They would not live by him; and “by their fail salvation came unto the Gentiles.” Perhaps sooner than would otherwise have been; perhaps more effectually. So were they, all unknowing, drawing the chariot of his kingdom; so, even now, is the “wrath of man” made to “praise” him.
3. God’s truth in condemnation of man’s falseness. Might they not say, “If God’s holiness shines the more brightly in contrast with my unholiness, if God’s purposes are more effectually worked out by reason of my perverseness and sin, shall I not therefore be approved rather than condemned? Nay, shall I not even make my lie to abound that his truth may abound? Such are the jesuitries of every age; such is the utter untruth of the heart of man. But man is a witness against himself; and therefore the apostle almost disdains reply. “Man! if the overruling of evil for good were ground of acquittal, then would all be acquitted; if evil were thereby justified, it might be therefore deliberately wrought! Let the conscience of each speak out against such utter immorality; let the acknowledged fact of a final judgment teach the futility of such a plea. The condemnation of the condemned is just!” So does he shear away their vain pleas, and the case for their arraignment is complete. It only remains that, for Jew and Gentile, the express testimony of God’s Word be adduced, as supplementary of the moral considerations of Rom 1:1-32. and 2., and all the world will be shown guilty before God.
Our Christian privileges, are they used or abused by us? Oh, let us take to heart those words, “Not every one that saith to me,” etc. (Mat 7:21-23).T.F.L.
Rom 3:9-20
Every mouth stolid.
The charge has been made against Gentiles and Jews; it is now forced home, and especially against the self-excusing Jews, by the unimpeachable verdict of God’s own Word. We have hereuniversal sin and universal guilt.
I. UNIVERSAL SIN. Some of the quotations referred in the first instance more particularly to Gentiles, some to Jews. But the fact that any of them referred to Jews is of itself sufficient for the apostle’s purpose, viz. to cut away from under their feet the vain hope which they cherished on account of their privileges. And further, as the apostle urges in Rom 3:19, all the quotations have a very proper bearing on the Jews, inasmuch as the words of the Law are for those who are under the Law, designed to show them their danger even when speaking expressly of the sin of others. There was that in them which might so develop itself, and being so developed, it was under the same condemnation.
1. A state of sin. (Rom 3:10-12; Psa 14:1-3.)
(1) The unrighteousness. “None righteous;” “none that doeth good.” There was
(a) no discerning of the will of God (Rom 3:11);
(b) no aspiration after God (Rom 3:11);
(c) an utter deviation from the right wayan utter corruption (Rom 3:12). Two positives, these latter, corresponding to the two negatives.
(2) Its universality. “There exists not,” four times repeated; “no, not one,” repeated twice. There is forcefully implied here that the germ of the same evil, which wrought itself out so flagrantly in special cases, is in every man’s heart; that is the charge which comes home to each man’s heart, and the truth of which each man’s conscience attests.
2. A practice of sin. (Rom 3:13-17; Psa 5:9; Psa 140:3; Psa 10:7; Isa 59:7, Isa 59:8.)
(1) Speech. (Rom 3:13, Rom 3:14.)
(a) Deceit-words of suave beguilement, but an inward ravening for the prey;
(b) venomswift, cutting words, shot like the poison of serpents;
(c) wrathblatant fury and oaths.
(2) Deeds. (Rom 3:15-17.)
(a) Violence and bloodshed are their aim;
(b) desolation and calamity mark their path;
(c) the path of peace they never tread.
3. A source of sin. (Rom 3:18; Psa 36:1.) The only effectual, permanent safeguard of morality is religion. Are the bonds not being loosened in our day, even by the apostles of ethics themselves?
II. UNIVERSAL GUILT.
1. A fact of historyto every one that has eyes to see. But attested, as above shown, by the verdict of the Law itself.
2. A fact of consciousnesswrought in the individual by the Law. The Law cannot justify; a mirror in which we see ourselves, and in that mirror fallen man sees himself fallen and corrupt. This the intent for which the Law was given, to bring us to self-knowledge, that then we might yearn for God’s salvation through Christ. For law and promise are ever intertwinedin Judaism, in Gentilism, in Christianity. The great result then: “every mouth stopped”conscious guilt; “all the world brought under the judgment of God”objective, historical guilt. Before God’s tribunal, in the heart and in history, man is condemned.
Let us thank God for his severe dealings, for they are in love. As in Tennyson’s ‘May Queen,’ “He taught me all the mercy, for he showed me all the sin.“ When the throne has become to us palpably the throne of judgment, then, and not till then, it is transformed into the throne of grace.T.F.L.
Rom 3:21-26
Redemption working righteousness.
A whole system of theology is compacted into these few words. The keystone of the arch. We have hereredemption; righteousness.
I. REDEMPTION. The redemption centres in Christ; it touches on either side God and man. Originating in the purposes of God, and actualized in the work of Christ, it is appropriated in the consciousness of man. These verses deal with one aspect of Christ’s work and of man’s salvationjustification through Christ’s atoning sacrifice. Hence we haveGod’s grace, Christ’s sacrifice, man’s faith.
1. God’s grace. (Rom 3:24.) This is the fountain-head, whence all salvation issues. Importance of holding forth this truth; not that God loves us because Christ died, but that Christ died because God loved us. So Joh 3:16. And yet the error has some element of truth. It was God’s compassionate love which prompted the bestowal of the gift, and the “setting forth” of the Propitiation (Joh 3:25); but only when the gut has been received, and the propitiation made ours through faith, does God, can God, love with an intimate, complacent love. First the pitying Father, then the forgiving Father, and then the reconciled, rejoicing Father.
2. Christ’s sacrifice. (Joh 3:25.) We are in the presence of a mystery, which we may not analyze too closely. In Christ, God and man are one, and therefore the sacrifice of Christ represents a sacrifice of God and a sacrifice of man. In him, man expiates his own sin; in him, the Infinite Love stoops and suffers and dies. It was a real atonement of the race; it was a real atonement for the race; and what God hath joined we may not put asunder.
3. Man’s faith. (Joh 3:22, Joh 3:25, Joh 3:26.) To reduce it to its simplest, ultimate form, it is but the acceptance of what God gives, of what can only come to us from without, apart from any efforts of our own (Joh 3:21), “freely” (Joh 3:24). And such faith is virtually included in true penitencethe penitence of the “poor in spirit;” and, we doubt not, such true penitence is therefore virtually in possession of the pardon which hovers round every repentant heart. But, for a consciousness of pardon, there is required a conscious faith, i.e. an intelligent, glad acceptance of the gift of God in Christ. And the more vivid and realistic the consciousness of faithor, may we say, the more strong and energetic the laying hold of life?the stronger and more joyous wilt be the experience of salvation, and the resultant love for God through Christ.
II. RIGHTEOUSNESS. Redemption and righteousness are not at variance, but rather redemption is the great instrumentality whereby the righteousness of God works the righteousness of man.
1. Man’s righteousness. Man’s righteousness is wrought by the redemption of Christ, and therefore it is all Divine (Joh 3:21, Joh 3:22). And yet it is truly man’s. The righteousness which is expressly spoken of here is a relative, not an actual, righteousness; i.e. a condition of acquittal in presence of Law and judgment. Hence the specific term, “justification” Such relative righteousness may be the adjunct of actual righteousness; the Law must acquit those who have perfectly fulfilled the Law. But can it be so with man? “All have sinned.” And even one sin destroys all possibility of acquittal this way. Therefore only by some extraneous, some substitutionary satisfaction of Law, can man be justified. Such satisfaction the redemption of Christ provides. He represents us all in the great atonement before God, and when we penitently acknowledge his representation and accept it, the satisfaction made by him is ours. The Law of the Jews was the discipline by which God was leading them to feel their need of a righteousness “apart from Law;” the prophets promised it. But since all need it, Gentiles as well as Jews, it is for all; “there is no distinction.”
2. God’s righteousness. Man’s righteousness and God’s are intervolved. Mere pardon would not set aside the claims of Law; justification respects those claims. The righteousness of God is his executive holinessthe active upholding of Law. It can only be manifested in the case of sin by punishment. This punishment must be of the individual offenders, or of some proper substitute. In Christ the great Head of the race is smittensmitten that the race may be justified. But only a relative righteousness, as productive again of actual righteousness, can be wrought by the righteousness of God; and therefore the justification is for penitents, believing in Christ. And the very faith itself of penitents in a Christ who died for sin, is the germ of a new righteousness of life. So, then, does God justify himself in justifying the ungodly; and so does he justify his past forbearance, whether as respects the world or the individual offender.
Thus in Christ is the great problem solved. God is “just, and the Justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus.” Is it more than a problem of the intellect to us? has it wrought itself out in our heart and life?T.F.L.
Rom 3:27-30
“Where is the glorying?”
The Jews were a glorying people; they gloried in God (see Rom 2:17), and they gloried in the Law (Rom 2:23). But now? All glorying was shut out.
I. THE FALSE GLORYING. Man’s almost universal perversion of religion. Religion should humble him, but he makes it the occasion of boasting. So eminently with the Jews.
1. In the Law. The Law was designed to teach sin, and quicken their longings for holiness. It had become an apparatus of self-righteousness.
2. In God. God made himself known to them, that through them he might be made known to others. And God was one. They, however, rested in him as theirs alone; and the very doctrine of the oneness of God was made the badge of separateness, and an instrument of bigotry.
II. GLORYING EXCLUDED. God will teach man humility; as towards himself, as towards man’s fellow-men. And the gospel is a potent instrumentality to this end. So, “Blessed are the poor in spirit.”
1. The law of faith: to which “the Law” must logically lead. We receive, as suppliants, on bended knee. “Not of works, lest any man should beast” (Eph 2:9).
2. The God of all. The very truth they held belied their pretensions; the God of all must be a God to all. So, then, the gospel was God’s gift of grace to men, to be accepted by man’s faith. None could do more; none might do less.
Our Christian knowledge and belief, our name of Christ, an occasion of glorying? Yes, in a true sense (Gal 6:14), but not boastfully. For the one should teach us a deep humility, with faith; the other a large, unfailing charity. “He is Lord of all.”T.F.L.
Rom 3:31
The harmony of Law and faith. God’s dispensations cannot possibly disagree; they may not have the same immediate purport, but they must harmonize. This verse is a triumphant challenge at the close of a conclusive argument. The harmony of Law and faith.
I. LAW. The great aim of the dispensation of Law was to teach man his sin and helplessness.
1. “Through the Law cometh the knowledge, of sin” (Rom 3:20). The Law within man fades in proportion as his disregard of it increases, and only by an objective Law can he then be taught his guilt. So did God, by a presentation of righteousness in the demands of the Law, bring home to man’s conscience his condemnation.
2. This objective holiness, by its claims upon man’s endeavours, not merely wrought condemnation in the conscience, but was designed to produce an intensest consciousness of incapacity. This not so directly intended by the apostle’s words now, but falls legitimately within their scope. We see, we desire; we cannot attain.
II. FAITH. When the dispensation of Law has done its disciplinary work, the dispensation of faith shall take its place.
1. A universal condemnation prepares for the reception of the gift of grace. The world is brought to its knees before God, stricken with guilt; and now he may speak words of pardon, to be received by faith. God the Giver, man the recipient at his hands; this the relation now. Faith annulling the Law? Nay, supplementing it, and justifying its work.
2. And so the new life of faithfaith in the forgiving love of God, a faith which brings hope and inspirationdoes but supplement, in no wise contradicts, the state of helplessness realized through the Law. We are at one with God; the chasm is bridged; and by his own loving help we can do his will.
To us Christians? Christ’s perfect life serves for Law. How great our guilt! how utter our impotence! But he stoops to die for us, and we receive forgiveness by faith; and, being in trustful and loving fellowship with him, we now can live by him. The “Law” of his life is established, not annulled, by faith.T.F.L.
HOMILIES BY S.R. ALDRIDGE
Rom 3:1, Rom 3:2
A sacred trust.
Questions break the even flow of a course of argumentation, and, by diversifying the stream, quicken the sluggish interest of the spectators. The catechetical method is characteristic of the Apostle Paul in his most vehement moods.
I. EXPLAIN THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE QUERY IN THE TEXT. It might seem strange for any to question the unexampled privileges enjoyed by the Jews, but the apostle has been laying the axe to the root of some barren trees of Jewish pretensions. He ruthlessly exposed the pleas of those who tried to shelter their non-compliance with God’s statutes behind the fact that they belonged to an elect race, as if to be an Israelite were in itself a guarantee of salvation. He showed that only the doers
speaks of the chief hindrance to profiting by the oracles, viz. a want of faith. Faith is the practical employment of gospel truth; not the comprehending of all its connections and relationships, or the sounding of its fathomless depths with our tiny plummet, but the utilization of its plain declarations and directions. The road to the cross no wayfarer can mistake.
2. We too have the Bible as a sacred charge for the benefit of our fellows. Israel was to serve all generations and all races of mankind, and the Church of Christ exists for no exclusive selfish ends, but for the enlightenment of every home and land. The very position of Great Britain in the carrying-trade of the globe marks our glory and responsibility. To have a deposit entrusted to our care involves vigilance lest it suffer damage. A mutilated library condemns its guardians, and closed doors mean the flight of the glory of the Lord from the sanctuary.S.R.A.
Rom 3:5-8
False conclusions concerning sin.
Like human works, Divine operations are liable to misconstruction. The serpent secretes poison from wholesome food. And the redemptive love of God may be perverted into a justification of sinful conduct by those who wish for an excuse, and fancy they find it in the very universality of unrighteousness which the apostle has demonstrated. For this universality, they say, shows that to sin is natural, and therefore not blameworthy. And they derive a further reason for the irresponsible and inculpable character of man’s sin in the splendour of the vindication of Divine righteousness, which is the outcome of human depravity. Let us state the truth in three propositions.
I. SIN IS OVERRULED BY GOD TO GREATER GOOD. The work of the Law evidenced in man’s accusing conscience, and in the state of degradation and misery to which a sinful career reduces man, becomes a convincing testimony that the Governor of the universe sets his face against evil. The dark background throws into bright relief the holiness of the Most High. Man learns more of his own nature through sin than he could otherwise have known, and perhaps realizes better the vast interval between the creature and the Creator. But especially in the gospel scheme of salvation, and in its effects upon those who heartily receive its benefits, does the righteousness of God shine out conspicuous. Our weakness and folly are the theatre for the display of his transcendent grace and power. The loss of Eden is naught compared with the gain of a heavenly paradise. Like the oyster whose fretting at the noxious intrusion produces the lustrous pearl, or like the clouds which reflect and magnify the effulgence of the setting sun, so has man’s fall furnished scope for the exhibition of love that stoops to suffering in order to redeem, and righteousness that triumphs over all the ravages of sin anti death. Man redeemed is to be raised to a higher plane; having tasted the knowledge of good and evil, he is thereby disciplined, renewed, through a more glorious manifestation of his Maker’s wisdom and self-sacrifice, to a nobler end. Like a crypt opened under an organ, deeper notes and a richer harmony shall result from the pit of destruction that yawned beneath the feet of our sinful race. Holy beings who have kept their first estate may detect a wondrous pathos in the songs of ransomed saints. The sentence, “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread,” has become a blessing to our fallen humanity, for by toilsome effort we gain experience, humility, and strength. And so, by the habit of wrestling against sinful impulses, we can acquire a security of position which innocent integrity could never guarantee. Which justified believer could really wish never to have had the necessity for gazing at the cross, which melts his soul and transforms his being? Thus is man’s unrighteousness made “to commend the righteousness of God.”
II. WILFUL SIN IS NOT, THEREFORE, TO GO UNPUNISHED. Mark the deceitfulness of sin, trying to find a cloak for its existence, and even a motive to its further commission, in the very method whereby God demonstrates his grief at its prevalence, and his determination to root it out of his dominions. No traitor could expect to escape judgment on the plea that his rebel designs, being detected, exposed, and defeated by his sovereign, had really only contributed to his monarch’s glory. Perhaps the direction in which the apostle’s argument needs chief application today is in respect of practical antinomianism. They mistake the intent of the atonement who can live as if the superabounding grace of Christ gives liberty to the recipient to neglect righteousness of behaviour. Full forgiveness for past conduct does not imply that all the natural consequences will be averted. The wound may be healed, but the scar shall remain. Men receive in themselves the harvest resulting from their seed-crop of thoughts and practices. The reasoning of the supposed objector in the text reminds one of the self-justifying query of a thief to the policeman, “What would you do for a livelihood if it were not for the likes of us?” Paul never hesitates to bring complacent sinners into the presence of the great white throne of judgment, in whose searching light delusive pretences fall away and leave the soul naked before God.
III. NOR IS SIN IN ANY FORM TO BE PERPETRATED WITH A VIEW TO GOOD EFFECTS. The condemnation is just of those who say, “Let us do evil, that good may come.” Modem preachers should not be surprised if their utterances get misinterpreted, since even the apostle’s clear statements did not prevent opponents from twisting his declarations into a proposition abhorrent to his mind. To permit sin in his children would be for God to allow the roots of his moral government to be cut. The casuistry of the Middle Ages was a trifling with the plain utterances of the inner judgment. Our only safe guide is morality. To do what we know to be wrong is always hurtful, though sometimes we may do harm by what we believe to be right. Man’s reason soon begins to spin out of itself a cocoon wherein it lies in dark imprisonment. The prevention of sin is better than its cure. An unrighteous policy is never expedient. Sweet at first, it turns to bitterness at the last. For Churches to seek by unrighteous methods to further the kingdom of God is like the action of the Irish agent, who, when ordered to take measures for the preservation of a certain ancient ruin, proceeded to use the stones of the ruin for a wall of enclosure to protect it against further harm. Righteousness alone can establish any throne and exalt any people. We have need of prayer and converse with Christ, that the spiritual vision may be keen enough to detect Satan, though appearing as “an angel of light.”S.R.A.
Rom 3:23
A remedy for a universal need.
To assert that the righteousness of God manifested in Christ was “apart from the Law” relegated the Law to its proper position, as the servant, not the master, of religion. And the apostle’s substantiation of his further assertion, that this new method of righteousness was not so entirely unheard of as that its novelty should be a strong prejudice against its truth, but that, on the contrary, the Law itself and the prophets contain intimations of such a Divine manifestation,this cut the ground entirely from under the feet of objectors jealous of every innovation which could not be justified by an appeal to the sacred writings. And this righteousness through faith recognized Jew and Gentile as alike in their need of a gospel, and their freedom of access thereto.
I. THERE IS NO DISTINCTION AMONGST MEN IN RESPECT OF THEIR NEED OF THE GOSPEL. Men are declared faulty in two respects.
1. By positive transgression. They “sinned,” they have done wrong, and they wander continually from the right way. They are not adjudged criminal merely on the ground of Adam’s fall, but they themselves cross the line which separates obedience from disobedience. Scripture, history, and conscience testify to this fact.
2. By defect. They “fall short of the glory of God.” Their past behaviour has been blameworthy, and their present condition is far below what was intended when man was formed in God’s image, to attain to his likeness. Compare the best of men with the example set by the Saviour of love to God and man, and of conformity to the highest standard discernible. Now, unless perfect, man cannot claim acquittal at the bar of judgment. Perfection is marred if one feature be distorted or one limb be missing or weak. This is not to be taken to signify that all men are equally sinful, that there are no degrees of enormity, and that all are equidistant from the kingdom of God. But it means that, without exception, all fail in the examination which Divine righteousness institutes, though some have more marks than others. Left to themselves, all men would drown in the sea of their iniquity, though some are nearer the surface than their fellows. The misunderstanding of this truth has done grievous harm to tender minds, fretting because they had not the same sense of awful misdoing that has been felt by notorious malefactors. We need not gauge the amount of contrition requisite; it suffices if the heart turn humbly to God for forgiveness. Thus the gospel does not flatter men. Soothing messages may comfort for a while till the awakening comes. Then we realize that it is of no use to be in a richly decorated cabin if the ship is sinking. To reveal the true state is the necessary preliminary to reformation. There is a down-rightness about the gospel assertions which, like the deep probing of the surgeon’s lance, wounds in order to thorough healing. Alas! that the disease of sin should so frequently produce lethargy in the sick! they feel no need of a physician! Lax notions of sin lessen our sense of the necessity of an atonement. We fail to discern a rebellion against the government of God, and an offence against the moral universe. We treat it as if it only concerned ourselves and our neighbours. No sprinkling of rose-water can purge away the evil; it can be cleansed only by the blood of the Lamb.
II. THERE IS NO DISTINCTION IN RESPECT OF THE MEANS OF SALVATION.
1. Justification comes in every case as a gift, not as a prize discovered or earned. “Being justified freely.” Part of the beneficial influence of the gospel is the blow it administers to human notions of desert, and pride is a chief obstacle to enrichment by this gift of God.
2. To all men the kindness of God is the source of their salvation. God first loved and sought the sinner, not contrariwise. His “grace” is the fountain of redemption.
3. The same Divine method of deliverance is employed for all. “Through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” There is but one way to the Father, whether men walk thereon consciously or unconsciously, in heathen twilight or gospel noontide, in Jewish anticipation or Christian realization. The one atonement can cover all transgression.
4. The same human mode of entrance into the kingdom is open to all, viz. by faith. Weakness, ignorance, degradation, cannot be pleaded as obstacles to salvation. The study of the philosopher is no nearer heaven than the cottage of the artisan. The capacity of trusting is possessed by every man; the remedy is not remote, therefore, from the reach of any of the sin-sick race.S.R.A.
HOMILIES BY R.M. EDGAR
Rom 3:1-8
Jewish privileges and Divine judgment.
From a consideration of the attitude of the Jewish world to God, the apostle proceeds in this section to state the privileges enjoyed by Jews, and to point out the corresponding danger of commensurate condemnation in case the privileges were neglected or abused. The Jew might be inclined to say, “If circumcision be not a seal of special privilege, if I am not to be accepted because of my circumcision and descent: what possible advantage is there in being a Jew?” Now, to this Paul answers that the Jew has many advantages, but in the mean time he will only emphasize onehe is the custodian of the Divine revelation. It is round this fact that the thought of the present section circulates. Let us try to grasp the truths as the apostle suggests them.
I. THE REVELATION CONFIDED TO THE CARE OF THE JEWS. (Rom 3:2.) Into the large subject of the Old Testament revelation we cannot, of course, enter. But it may be noted that the revelation is in foundation historical; it gives the history of a peculiar people; it brings out the meaning of their historyhow they had been under a Divine discipline and education from the days of Abraham down to the days of Christ. Not only so, but the revelation turned the minds of its possessors towards the future, speaking of a suffering as well as glorified Messiah, who was coming to set up his kingdom. The revelation was thus a fountain of hope for all who possessed it. Besides, it was a means of self-examination, for it analyzed the motives and exposed the depravity of the human heart. To say that there was no literature possessed by other nations to be compared for a moment with the Hebrew literature is to state the case tamely. The nation possessing such “holy oracles” ought to have been the holiest, most humble, and most hopeful of all the nations. God was clearly calling them as a people into an exceeding great and glorious inheritance. A pure and inspiring literature is a chief national possession. Beside this, all other advantages are trifling. And so the circumcised Jew might well rejoice in being the custodian of the most splendid national literature existing in the world.
II. SOME, WHILE PRESERVING THE BOOK, DID NOT BELIEVE THE MESSAGE THAT IT BROUGHT. (Rom 3:3.) It is admitted on all hands that the Old Testament was preserved by the Jews with scrupulous care. Texts and even letters were counted, and nothing was left to be desired so far as custody is concerned. But many, alas! of the custodians did not appreciate the message which the book brought them. It did not undermine their pride; its utterances about the deceitfulness of the human heart were referred to other people. Its statements also about the sufferings of Messiah were largely ignored, so that when Messiah came as a Man of sorrows they rejected him, and continued to look for another Messiah, who would pose in triumphant majesty at the head of an emancipated nation. Accordingly, they did not believe either in the book or in the Messiah it promised. They thought, indeed, that they had eternal life in the book, but they refused to come to the Person the book pointed out, and who alone had eternal life to bestow (cf. Joh 5:39, Joh 5:40). They thus gave the lie to revelation, and took up arms against God and his Son. Yet such unbelief did not invalidate the Divine revelation or interfere with God’s faithfulness. The book contained threatenings as well as promises; it has its Ebal as well as its Gerizim. If, therefore, souls insist on disbelieving God’s promises and threatenings, he can still abide faithful, and does not need to deny himself. He can execute judgment on the unbelievers, and so secure his glory in their despite.
III. THE EXPEDIENCY DOCTRINE OF DOING EVIL THAT GOOD MAY COME MERITS THE STRONGEST REPROBATION. (Rom 3:4-8.) Unbelief does not, as we have seen, invalidate God’s faithfulness. God preserves his glory in man’s despite. In these circumstances, the objection is easily raised that unbelief, and indeed unrighteousness in all its forms, contribute to God’s glory; his righteousness is seen to the more advantage through this foil. The sinner is consequently contributing to the Divine glory, and so should not suffer for thus co-operating. In the light of God’s providential plan, every evil-doer is contributing to the display of the Divine righteousness. Now, this doctrine of expedient evil, with its resultant good, has been the continual resort of the unscrupulous. But it is worthy of the very strongest reprobation. For, in the first place, it overlooks the fact that evil-doers are not voluntary contributors to the Divine glory. Evil-doing is really the running counter to God’s will in all things. If evil-doers are contributors to God’s glory, it is in spite of themselves. They deserve no consideration, therefore, on this account. And, in the second place, while God overrules their evil-doing for his glory, he is in no sense the Author of sin, and so in no sense does evil that good may come. For, in granting freedom to his creatures, God was granting the one condition of the existence of virtue, and has no responsibility when his creatures diverted it into the channel of waywardness and sin. The evil is the act of his creatures entirely; with them the responsibility rests; all that God does is to transmute the evil into good by his wondrous wisdom, justice, and love. Consequently the doing of evil can only be under the pretence of good resulting from it. Evil-doers wax worse and worse; they may pretend to seek good, but their spirit gives the lie to their profession, and warrants their condemnation. It is diabolical doctrine, and its damnation is just.
IV. GOD‘S RIGHTS AS JUDGE CANNOT BE DISREGARDED. (Rom 3:5, Rom 3:6.) A general judgment is expected by all impartial minds. It is seen by all not blinded by good fortune that good and evil are not distributed in this life according to desert. We are in a dispensation where much is reserved, and a judgment to come can alone afford the opportunity of putting things right. Suppose, then, that the right to punish evil-doers is denied on this ground of their contributing to God’s glory; it is plain that the whole idea of judgment, either present or to come, must fall to pieces. In these circumstances we should have no judge to appeal to, and no hope of even checking triumphant wrong. Faith in the Divine administration would be lost, and society would really relapse into barbarism. Hence God’s rights as Judge must be respected, and evil-doers prepare themselves for wrath, if they refuse to be reconciled to him. This guarantee of God’s rights as Judge is one of the marks of the Old Testament revelation. There we see, sooner or later, judgment overtaking evil-doing. Even when the evil-doer is, like David, an Oriental despot, God’s judgments search him out; so that the one hope of the sinner is to betake himself to penitence, and if he can, as in the fifty-first psalm, acknowledge his sin and justify God, as he condemns and visits with displeasure the sin (Psa 51:4; Rom 3:4), then the pardon and the peace and the joy of believing may be his. But the Judge must be recognized and his rights respected, else the individual and society itself must remain unsaved.R.M.E.
Rom 3:9-20
Knowledge of sin through the Law.
Having described the Jewish privileges and the Divine judgment for the abuse of these privileges, the apostle now proceeds to ask and to answer the question, “Are we [Jews] preferred ()?” This means, in God’s esteem; and it is answered without hesitation, “No, in no wise.” And the proof has already been given: “For we before laid to the charge both of Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin” (Revised Version). We are, consequently, face to face in this section with the truth of universal guilta fact proclaimed alike by the heathen conscience and the Jewish Scriptures.
I. JEWS AND GREEKS ARE ALL UNDER SIN. (Rom 3:9.) It is here that a gracious work must begin in the soul. All possibility of self-righteous confidence must be taken away; the soul must be brought low through a sense of sin. Instead, therefore, of Jews being put into a class of Divine favourites, accepted because of their descent or circumcision, they are put by Paul into the one universal class of guilty men. They have as little ground of hope in themselves as the most abandoned heathen. It is here, accordingly, that we must all come. We must take our stand with the race and realize that we are all guilty before God. We come under a law of condemnation, and no amount of Pharisaic self-righteousness will make any of us an exception. God will not respect the persons of any; all must first humble themselves before him under a genuine sense of sin.
II. UNIVERSAL GUILT IS ASSERTED IN THE JEWISH SCRIPTURES. (Rom 3:10-18.) Paul, in making his quotations, gives us some from the Psalms, some from Proverbs, some from the Prophet Isaiah; but the sad chorus is in perfect unison about human guilt and its accompanying depravity. The psalm from which he quotes first, the fourteenth, represents God as looking down from heaven to see, if possible, some righteous man; but the verdict to which he is compelled to come is that “there is none righteous, no, not one.” Instead of the knowledge of his Name, and its corresponding righteousness, there was nothing, visible but guilt and corruption. Human history was one long catalogue of selfishness and crime. There were no redeeming features in humanity, wherever left to itself. Hence the “oracles” possessed by the Jews were no flattering unction for Jewish souls. So far from this, the Old Testament Scriptures demonstrated the guilt and waywardness of the chosen people, as well as of the surrounding heathen, and made the most sweeping charges against one and all If Jews hope for consideration and acceptance on the ground of their possession of the book, they were entirely mistaken, for they were simply custodians of their own condemnation. And, indeed, this is one of the wonders of the world, that a literature which is so faithful with guilty men, that is always knocking down their self-righteousness, and flattering them never, should, notwithstanding, be so popular among them. The severest censor of all has, nevertheless, become the most revered. It is in this light a great encouragement to all who have the desire to be faithful with their fellows, that faithfulness will sooner or later be appreciated!
III. No HOPE CAN CONSEQUENTLY BE PLACED IN HUMAN MERIT. (Verse 19.) The severe judgment expressed in the Jewish Law is not meant merely for heathens, but especially for Jews who had the Law, in order that every mouth might be stopped, and all the world brought in guilty before God. By the deeds of the Law, consequently, no flesh need expect to be justified in God’s sight. One unvarying tale it has been of guilt and condemnation. All notion of merit must, consequently, be cast to the winds. Now, this is the greatest service which can be rendered to any soul. If we compare Php 3:7, Php 3:8, we shall see that the idea of merit cost the Apostle Paul many painful years. He was going about to establish his own righteousness, by asserting his pure Jewish descent and his ceremonial obedience and his headlong zeal; and he was under the delusion that by such a record he could claim as a just right acceptance and honour before God. But the moment he met his risen Saviour on the way to Damascus, he saw that all these self-righteous years were lost, and that “merit” had only kept him away from Christ. In the very same way, anxious souls are kept oftentimes away from Christ by the delusion that they can render themselves, somehow, more acceptable unto him. Let us bless God when he annihilates our delusions and leads us clear of all fancied merit. It is down in the dust of guilt and felt unworthiness that we are sure to receive our gracious exaltation.
IV. BY THE LAW IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN. (Php 3:20.) The Jews took the ceremonial law as a law of life, and by keeping little rites and ceremoniesthe more, they imagined, the betterthey thought they could earn the Divine favour and glory. Had they looked into the ceremonies with proper care, they would have seen in those given by Moses a constant note of condemnation. The moral Law, besides, with its magnificent ideal and standard, only intensified the sense of guilt in the soul of the thoughtful worshipper. In consequence of human sin, the Law ceases to be a way of life, and becomes a tremendous indictment and condemnation. It is this use of the Law which we are to recognize. It is, then, a most wholesome revealer of our real and lost condition. It drives us out of our refuges of lies and fancied merit, that we may betake ourselves to Christ alone. It is the light which exposes the dark chambers of our souls, and brings us to conviction and repentance. Let us make the proper use of the Law, and it will, as a schoolmaster, bring us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith. It will lead us to see that until Christ came there was no real merit in the world on which God could look with complacency. Only when Jesus allied himself with the race was the outlook on humanity in any wise redeemed.R.M.E.
Rom 3:21-31
Justification through faith in Christ.
The design of the Law, to intensify our sense of sin, having been made plain, the apostle, in the present paragraph, proceeds to show where justification comes from. It does not come from the Law; for the Law can only give us condemnation. It comes from a source foretold in “the Law and the prophets”from Jesus Christ, our Propitiation. And more than justification, as we shall now see, proceeds from this marvellous source. Three leading thoughts are presented in this passage.
I. ANTE–CHRISTIAN SIN WAS JUSTLY PASSED BY ON THE GROUND OF CHRIST‘S PROMISED PROPITIATION. The picture the apostle gives us of the universal depravity and guilt of mankind suggests the inquiryHow did God deal with it? And one undeniable fact was that in Old Testament times man’s wickedness was in many cases “passed by.” Instead of executing speedy vengeance on human sin, God only flamed forth upon it occasionally, and during the intervening periods, or in the other places he seemed to “wink at” the wickedness, and passed it over in silence. The result in many cases was this, that because sentence against an evil work was not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men was fully set in them to do evil (Ecc 8:11). If such was the result in some cases, how can we vindicate God’s procedure? Now, the apostle’s position in this passage is thisthat the “passing by” of sin, just as well as the pardon of sin, has its justification in the atonement of Christ. It will be well for us to consider for a moment what is secured by the passing by of ante-Christian sin. When we look into ante-Christian history, we see that, though God passed by a good deal of sin, he did not pass it all by. The Deluge, the vengeance taken on Sodom and Gomorrah, the trials of the children of Israel in the great and howling wilderness, the perils in the conquest of Canaan, the Egyptian and Babylonian invasions of Palestine, not to mention other instances, showed that God could, when he pleased, execute fierce vengeance upon man for his sins. But a vast amount of sin admittedly went unpunished. Now, strange as it may appear, to quote from a thoughtful writer, “this very imperfection [in the execution of justice] seems to be the strongest possible proof that, in the next world, vengeance will be fulfilled to the utmost. For observe, if we found that every man in this life received just what be deserved, and every evil work always brought swift punishment along with it, what should we naturally conclude? There is no future punishment in store: I see nothing wanting; every man has already received the due reward of his works; everything is already complete, and, therefore, there is nothing to be done in the next world. Or if, on the other hand, there were no punishment visited upon sin at all in the world, we might be inclined to say, ‘Tush! God hath forgotten;’ he never interferes amongst us; we have no proof of his hatred of sin, or of his determination to punish it; he is gone away far from us, and has left us to follow our own wills and imaginations. So that if sentence were either perfectly executed upon earth, or not executed at all, we might have some reason for saying that there was a chance of none in a future world. But now it is imperfectly executed; just so much done, as to say, ‘You are watched,my eye is upon you; I neither slumber nor sleep; and my vengeance slumbereth not.’ And yet, at the same time, there is so little done, that a man has to look into eternity for the accomplishment.” If God, by passing over ante-Christian sin, provided a chief argument for a world and judgment to come, then we can see how he could justly pass by the sin when he had promised in the Law and the prophets a propitiation. It is a difficulty with some to see exactly how “Christ tasted death for every man,“ even for for those who will not accept of pardon But the respite more or less lengthy, which all sinners enjoy before the execution of deserved vengeance upon them, is owing to Christ’s propitiation. God can justly stay his hand, since the atoning sacrifice has been secured. In view of the promised propitiation, in ante-Christian times God’s righteousness was vindicated in passing by the sins of men and postponing their punishment. God’s justice was provided for, while he indulged his forbearance and passed over the sins of men.
II. JUSTIFICATION WAS ALSO EXTENDED TO FAITH IN THE PROPITIATION OF CHRIST. Not only does Christ’s propitiation justify the Divine forbearance (Rom 3:25), as we have just seen, but it also justifies the pardon and acceptance of the believer. By trusting in the propitiation of Christ, we find ourselves justified from all things, from which w? could not be justified by the Law of Moses. The state of the case, as Paul here puts it, is this. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile as far as condemnation is concerned. We are all condemned, for we all sinned ( is the aorist, and refers to a previous act, and this was, doubtless, man’s fall in Eden), and were destitute of God’s glory. But we come to see in Jesus Christ a divinely appointed and promised “propitiation” (), not surely a mere “mercy-seat,” but an “atoning sacrifice” in whose shed blood we can trust ( ); and on the ground of the satisfaction thus rendered to Divine justice by a Divine Redeemer, God can be just, and at the same time justify the believer in Jesus. “Perhaps,” says Shedd, in his ‘Critical and Doctrinal Commentary,’ “the force of the middle voice should be insisted upon: ‘God set forth for himself.’ The atonement of Christ is a self-satisfaction for the Triune God. It meets the requirements of that Divine nature which is equally in each Person. ‘God hath reconciled us to himself ()’ (2Co 5:18, 2Co 5:19; Col 1:20). In the work of vicarious atonement, the Godhead is both subject and object, active and passive. God holds the claims, and God satisfies the claims; he is displeased, and he propitiates the displeasure; he demands the atonement, and he provides the atonement.” And here we should be very clear about the perfectly gratuitous character of our justification, We are justified “freely” () by way of gift, as a matter of pure grace, our only possible relation to it being gratitude for a free gift. To trust in our propitiation, or rather in our Propitiator, is no more a merit than it it is for a beggar to hold out his hand for alms. We do Christ the greatest injustice, we deny him his rights, so long as we refuse to trust him. Our pardon and acceptance as believers, therefore, are granted for the sake of Jesus Christ.
III. NO BOASTING CAN BE BUILT ON THE LAW OF FAITH. (Rom 3:27-31.) Gratuitous justification, the apostle proceeds next to show, excludes all boasting. As we have seen, we have no merit before the Law, but stand condemned. We escape condemnation by a gratuitous justification extended to us on the ground of our Redeemer’s merits. Our faith in this loving, self-sacrificing Redeemer is only giving him his due! All who accept of justification, therefore, on these terms are excluded by this “law of faith” from boasting. We realize that we must make our boast only in the Lord. He is the sole ground of our confidence. The “deeds of the Law” do not enter into the question of our justification; good works come in the Christian life as the effect of our pardon and acceptance; we are “created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them” (Eph 2:10). Jew and Gentile have alike, therefore, to accept of justification as God’s free gift through the propitiation of Christ, and as grateful penitents to set about proving our gratitude through suitable good works. The Law is thus established, first, through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus; and, secondly, through the new obedience of the grateful and lowly minded believer. The magnificent plan of salvation, so far from proving any illegality, is entirely in the interests of law and order. What it secures is a mighty multitude of meek and lowly men, each one of whom feels laid under everlasting obligation through the gratuitous pardon and acceptance he has received through Christ, and bound in consequence to do all he can to prove how grateful he is. May we all belong to this self-emptied and lowly minded company!R.M.E.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Rom 3:1. The Apostle, in the latter end of the foregoing chapter, has carried his argument to the utmost length. What remains is, to keep the Jew in temper, to fix his convictions, and to draw the general conclusion. He has shewn that the Jews were rather more wicked than the Gentiles, and stood condemned by such of them as sincerelydid their duty through the secret influences of divine grace; that a possession of the law, circumcision, and an outward profession of relation to God, gave them no character, and signified nothing, as to their acceptance with him. This was in effect to say, that the Jews were as unworthy to be continued in the church, as the Gentiles to be taken into it; and consequently, that in order to their enjoying the privileges of the church, under the Messiah, they stood in need of a fresh display of grace; which if they rejected, God would cast them out of the vineyard. And the Apostle was sensible that the Jew would understand what he had said in this sense. To set aside his law, his circumcision, his external advantages, as insufficient to gain him any interest in the favour of God, was to strip him of his peculiar honours, and quite ruin him as a Jew. This must be very disgusting: and the Apostle, who had often debated the point with his countrymen, knew very well what a Jew would be ready to say upon this occasion. Here, therefore, he seasonably introduces a dialogue between himself and the Jew, indulging, as it were, his disgust, by giving him leave to speak for himself; Rom 3:1-8 and what he is supposed to speak, we have reason to think was what the Jews had actually replied and objected against the Apostle. This would amuse, and at the same time instruct him, and possibly cool his resentment; especially as the Apostle’s answer to the first question is much in his favour. There seems no room to doubt, that this dialogue relates to the rejection of the Jews; a subject which would have come in here naturally enough. But then it would have broken in too much upon the Apostle’s argument: for which reason he but just touches upon it here, reserving the full consideration of it to the 9th, 10th, and 11th chapters; particularly ch. Rom 9:4-23; where we have the same questions more distinctly put, answered, and largely discussed; only we may observe, that here they relate solely to the rejection of the Jews, but there they take in also the calling of the Gentiles. After the dialogue, St. Paul resumes his argument, Rom 3:9 proves farther by Scripture quotations, that the Jews were guilty before God as well as other men, Rom 3:10-19 and concludes that no part of mankind could have a right to the blessings of God’s kingdom and covenant upon the footing of any works of obedience which they had done, Rom 3:20 but only by the favour of God in the Gospel; which he explains, Rom 3:21, &c. The sum and force of the Apostle’s argument is this: “All sorts of men, Jews as well as Gentiles, have sinned: therefore no part of mankind can lay claim to the blessings of God’s kingdom and covenant upon the score of obedience; and therefore the Jew stands as much in need of grace or favour, to give him a title to those blessings under the kingdom of the Messiah, as the Gentile. Consequently the Gentile has as good a title as the Jew; for those blessings are given only by grace; and grace, or mere favour, is alike free to all mankind: and when all are in equal circumstances, it is perfectly absurd for any to pretend to engross it to themselves, exclusively of others, who are as good, or but as bad, as they.” And thus the Apostle very solidly, and to our great comfort, proves, that we Gentiles, through faith alone, have a good and firm title to all the blessings of the Gospel covenant; pardon, privileges, ordinances, the Spirit of God, and the rich hope of everlasting life.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
, [730] 2
[730] On chap. 3 see Matthias, exeget. Abhandlung ber vv. 1 20 (a school-programme), Hanau 1851; and the same author’s work: das dritte Kap. d. Br. an d. Rm., ein exeg. Versuch , Cassel 1857; James Morison, A critical exposition of the Third Chapter of Paul’s Epistle to the Romans , Lond. 1866.
Rom 3:1 , [731] 2. As an inference ( ) from Rom 2:28-29 , the objection might now be made from the Jewish standpoint against the Apostle, that he quite does away with the advantage of Judaism and the benefit of circumcision. This objection he therefore raises in his own person , in order to remove it himself immediately, Rom 3:2 ff.
. . [732] ] the superiority (Mat 5:47 ; Mat 11:9 ; Plat. Ap. S. p. 20 C; Lucian. Prom. 1; Plut. Demosth . 3) of the Jew, i.e. what he has as an advantage over the Gentile, the Jewish surplus . The following ( or , to express it in other words) . . . presents substantially the same question in a more specific form.
] Much , namely, is the of the Jew or the benefit of circumcision. [733] The neuter comprehends the answer to both; and it must not therefore be said that it applies only to the first question, leaving the second without further notice. It is moreover clear from what precedes and follows, that Paul meant the not in a moral, but in a theocratic sense; comp Rom 9:4 f.
] in every way (Xen. Anab. vi. 6, 30), in whatever light the matter may be considered. See examples in Wetstein. The opposite: , 2Ma 11:31 ; Polyb. iv. 84, 8, viii. 27, 2. It is an undue anticipation to take the expression as hyperbolical (Reiche), since we do not know how the detailed illustration, which is only begun, would be further pursued.
] first of all, firstly , it is a prerogative of the Jew, or advantage of circumcision, that etc. The Apostle consequently begins to illustrate the according to its individual elements, but, just after mentioning the first point, is led away by a thought connected with it, so that all further enumeration (possibly by , Xen. Mem. iii. 6, 9) is dropped, and not, as Grotius strangely thinks, postponed to Rom 9:4 . Compare on Rom 1:8 ; 1Co 11:18 . As the was evidently meant to be followed by a corresponding , it was a mere artificial explaining away of the interruption of the discourse, to render praecipue (Beza, Calvin, Toletus, Estius, Calovius, Wolf, Koppe, Glckler, and others; compare also Hofmann: “before all things”), or to say with Th. Schott, that it indicates the basis from which the follows .
. . . ] that they (the Jews) were entrusted with the utterances of God , namely, in the holy Scriptures given to them, devoutly to preserve these as a Divine treasure, and to maintain them for all ages of God’s people as their and their children’s (comp Act 2:39 ) possession. On the Greek form of expression (1Co 9:17 ; Gal 2:7 ), see Winer, p. 244 [E. T. 326].
. ] eloquia Dei. That by this general expression ( , Chrysostom), which always receives its more precise definition from the context (Act 7:38 ; Heb 5:12 ; 1Pe 4:11 ; compare the passages from the Septuagint in Schleusner, Thes. III. p. 464, from Philo in Loesner, p. 248; and see especially Bleek on Heb. II. 2, p. 114 f.), Paul means here the Messianic prophetic-utterances , is shown by Rom 3:3 , where the of the Jews leaves no room for mistake as to the contents of the . Compare , Rom 9:4 . These . are contained not merely in the prophets proper (Act 3:24 ), but even in the Pentateuch (covenant with Abraham, the promise of Moses); yet the law is not meant, nor even jointly included (Matthias), against which Rom 3:3 testifies. Just as little is there meant: all making known of God in the history of salvation ” (Hofmann), which is too general, and is extended by Hofmann even to the New Testament revelations. Regarding the classic use of , [736] prophecies , see Krger on Thuc. ii. 8, 2, and generally Locella, a [737] Xen. Eph. p. 152 f.
[731] On chap. 3 see Matthias, exeget. Abhandlung ber vv. 1 20 (a school-programme), Hanau 1851; and the same author’s work: das dritte Kap. d. Br. an d. Rm., ein exeg. Versuch , Cassel 1857; James Morison, A critical exposition of the Third Chapter of Paul’s Epistle to the Romans , Lond. 1866.
[732] . . . .
[733] This answer is the Apostle’s , not the reply of a Jew asserting his , whom Paul then interrupts in ver. 4 with (Baur in the theol. Jahrb. 1857, p. 69) a breaking up of the text into dialogue, which is neither necessary nor in any way indicated, and which is not supported by any analogy of other passages. According to Mehring Paul has written ver. 2, and in fact onward to ver. 8, as the sentiments of a Jew to be summarily dealt with, who in had it in view to enumerate yet further advantages, but whose mouth was closed by ver. 9. The unforced exposition of the successive verses does not permit this view; and Rom 2:25-29 is not at variance with ver. 2, but, on the contrary, leaves sufficiently open to the Apostle the recognition of Jewish privileges, which he begins to specify; comp. Rom 2:25 and Rom 9:4 f.
[736] The word is not a diminutive form (Philippi, who finds in it the usual brevity of oracular utterances), but the neuter form of . The diminutive conception, little utterances , is expressed not by , but by , Plat. Eryx. p. 401 E. This applies also in opposition to Morison.
[737] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
Rom 3:1-20
1What advantage then hath [What, then, is the advantage of] the Jew? or what profit is there [what is the benefit] of circumcision? 2Much every way: chiefly, [First, indeed,]1 because that unto them were committed [they 3i.e., the Jewswere entrusted with, ] the oracles of God. For what [What, then,]2 if some did not believe [were faithless]? shall their unbelief [faithlessness, or, unfaithfulness] make the faith of God without effect4[destroy, or, nullify the faithfulness of God]?3 God forbid: [Let it not be!]4 yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest [mayest] be justified in thy sayings, and mightest [mayest] overcome when thou art judged5 [Psa 51:4]. 5But if our unrighteousness commend [doth establish]6 the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance [who is inflicting, or, bringing down, the wrath, ]?7 (I speak as a man [after the manner of men, ].) 6God forbid: [Let it not be!] for then how shall God judge the world? 7For [But] if8 the truth [covenant-faithfulness] of God hath more abounded through my lie [was made the more conspicuous by means of my falsehood, unfaithfulness] unto his glory [Rom 5:20]; why yet [still, any longer] am I also judged as 8a sinner? And not rather, (as we be [are] slanderously [blasphemously] reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come?9 whose damnation [condemnation, judgment]10 is just. 9What then? are we better than they?11 No, in no wise [Not at all]: for we have before proved [charged] both Jews and Gentiles, that they are 10[to be] all under sin; As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: 11There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. 12They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there 13is none that doeth good, no, not one [Psa 14:1-3].12 Their throat is an open sepulchre;13 with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps Isaiah 14 under their lips [Psa 5:9; Psa 140:3].14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness15[Psa 10:7]:15 Their feet are swift to shed blood: 16Destruction and misery are in their ways: 17And the way of peace have they not known 18[Isa 59:7-8]:16 There is no fear of God before their eyes [Psa 36:1].17 19Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may 20become guilty before God. [,] Therefore [because] by18 the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified [by works of the law no flesh (i.e., no person) shall (can) be declared righteous] in his sight:19 for [. For] by the law is the knowledge of sin [comes a knowledge of sin].
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Survey.1. The use of circumcision. Its two-fold operation, according to the conflicting conduct of the Jews. Its spiritual significance, by which the Gentile can be a Jew, and the Jew a Gentile; Rom 3:25-29. 2. The objective advantage of historical Judaism. The authority of the Word of God, which remains established by virtue of Gods faithfulness to His covenant, though many of the Jews become unfaithful. By this unfaithfulness they must even cause the glory of Gods faithfulness to abound. Nevertheless, the unfaithful are responsible for their guilt, and the application of the sin of unfaithfulness to the glory of God would be a wicked transgression; Rom 3:1 to Rom 8:3. The subjective equality of the Jews with the Gentiles. In a subjective relation, the former have no advantage, since, according to the witnesses of the Old Testament, they are in a severe condemnation. The conclusion: All the world stands guilty before God; Rom 3:9-20.The whole section contains, briefly, the three points: 1. Circumcision (Judaism) is conditionally either an advantage, or not; 2. as far as the designed mission of Judaism was concerned, it was an advantage; 3. from the conduct of the Jews, as opposed to the righteousness of God, it was no advantage.
First Paragraph (Rom 3:25-29)
Rom 3:25. For circumcision indeed profiteth (or availeth). After the Apostle has portrayed the corruption of the Jews, he comes to the objection of Jewish theology, or also to the argument from the theocratic standpoint: What, then, is the prerogative of circumcision? Does not circumcision, as Gods covenant promise, protect and sustain the Jews? Answer: The advantage of circumcision is (according to the nature of a covenant) conditional. It is actually available (not merely useful); it accomplishes its complete work when the circumcised keep the law. Plainly, circumcision here falls under the idea of a covenant. It is a mark of the covenant of the law, by which God will fulfil His promise to the Jew on condition that the Jew keep the law (see Exo 19:7-8; Deu 26:16). But afterward the circumcision of God is made prominent as Gods institution; it remains in force, though a part of the Jews become faithless to the covenant relation. But this rests upon its inner nature or symbolical significance, as a promise and pledge of the circumcision of the heart; that is, a continual sincerity and heartiness in the fulfilment of the law (Deu 10:16; Deu 30:6; Jer 4:4; Col 2:11; Act 7:51 : Uncircumcised in heart and ears). The consequence is, that the one who is circumcised is received into the people of the covenant. But the idea of the people of the covenant gradually becomes more profound, just as that of the covenant and the new birth itself, as the time of their fulfilment in the New Testament approaches. It is from this point of view that the following discussion must also be explained.It is of usethat is, it accomplishes what it should accomplish according to its original idea.If thou keep the law. Here the question is plainly not concerning the perfect fulfilment of the law in the Jewish sense (Tholuck); which is opposed by Rom 3:26; Rom 3:15. Nor can the Apostle anticipate here so soon the New Testament standpoint of faith, according to which believers alone, including those from the Gentiles, have the real circumcision. He therefore means the fulfilment of the law according to the measure of sincerity and heartiness by which either Jew or Gentile is prepared to obey the truth of the gospel (Rom 3:7-8).But if thou art a transgressor. One of the mystical expositions of the Pentateuch, Shamoth Rabbah (from about the 6th century), expresses the same thought in the same figurative drapery: The heretics and the ungodly in Israel should not say, Because we are circumcised, we do not descend to the Gehenna. What does God do? He sends His angels, and brings back their uncircumcision, so that they descend to Gehenna (Tholuck).20 The expressions transgressor and uncircumcision were especially terrible to the Jews. Uncircumcision was the peculiar characteristic of the impurity of heathendom, as circumcision denoted the consecration and holiness of the Jewish people. But here it is stated, not merely that uncircumcision takes the place of circumcision, but that circumcision actually becomes uncircumcision. That is, the unbelieving Jew becomes virtually a Gentile. [What is here said of Jewish circumcision, is equally applicable to Christian baptism: it is a great blessing to the believer, as a sign and seal of the New Covenant, and a title to all its privileges, but it avails nothing, yea, it is turned into a curse, by the violation of the duties implied in this covenant.P. S.]
Rom 3:26. Therefore, if the uncircumcision. The Apostle here uses the Jews mode of expression. , uncircumcision, stands in the first clause of the sentence as an abstract term for the concrete , uncircumcised; hence the [i.e., of such an ] after the second ).21 . The requirements of the law in essential matters, as ., Rom 3:14; as they can be observed by the Gentile also. [The moral requirements, not the ceremonial, among which circumcision was the very first. The E. V. here mistakes for .P. S.] Be counted for circumcision. He shall be accepted as a Jew who is obedient to the law (Mat 8:11; 1Co 7:19; Gal 5:6). The clause is supposed by Philippi to apply to the Proselytes of the Gate. But these have ceased to be Gentiles in the full sense of the word. The point here throughout is not concerning the form, but the disposition. Fritzsche refers the future [] to the final judgment; but Meyer, and others, regard it as applying to the abstract future: As often as the question concerns justification. Assuredly the Apostle has already in mind the definite future, the day when the gospel is preached.
Rom 3:27. And he who is uncircumcised by nature [ belongs to , not to ] will judge thee [, rise up in judgment by his example; comp. Mat 12:41-42, where is used]. Analogies to this bold word can be found in the Gospels, Mat 3:9; Mat 8:11; Mat 12:41, and others; and even back in the Old Testament. The sentence is read by many as a question, as the previous verse; while the is again supplied in thought before (Rckert, Tholuck [in the earlier editions, but not in the fifth.P. S.], Lachmann, and others). On the contrary, as a declaration, it is a definite answer and conclusion to Rom 3:26 (Luther, Erasmus, De Wette, Meyer).Uncircumcised by nature. The Gentile as he is by virtue of his natural birth, as is the Jew no less. The is erroneously made by Koppe to relate to . ; still more artificial is Olshausens explanation: The Gentile world observing the law without higher aid.Who with the letter [ ]. The reminds us of the declaration in Rom 7:11 : For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me (cumenius, Beza, and others). Yet it should be urged here, as Meyer properly remarks, that such a Jew, in spite of the law, transgresses it. But that he becomes a transgressor (), and not merely a sinner (), rests upon the fact that he is in possession and knowledge of the law (Rom 5:13-14). The expression defines the law in its specific character as written law [not in a disparaging sense, in opposition to ]; circumcision () is the appropriate obligation to the same.
Rom 3:28. For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly. We here have a succession of brief utterances (breviloquenti).22 Meyer translates: For not he who is a Jew externally, is a [genuine] Jew. This means, in complete expression (according to De Wette and others): Not the one who is a Jew externally is a Jew, that is, is on that account already a Jew internally, or a true Jew. Thus, also, the second clause of the verse should be understood: Neither is the circumcision which is external in the flesh, genuine circumcision; the external sign is not the reality: it is the symbolical mask of the reality. Tholuck: Mar 12:33, as well as other examples, prove that this view was not unknown to the Scribes. Yet even this, and the expression quoted from the TalmudThe Jew consists in the innermost parts of the heart23is far from resembling this Pauline antithesis.
Rom 3:29. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly. Explanations: 1. He who is internally a Jew is a Jew; and the circumcision of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter, is circumcision (De Wette, Tholuck, with Beza, Este, Rckert). Here the absent predicate is in the concluding word. 2. But he who is one inwardly, is a Jew, and circumcision of the heart rests in the spirit, not in the letter (Luther, Erasmus, Fritzsche, Meyer). In the first construction, the ellipses are very strong; in the second, circumcision of the heart creates an anticipation which is at variance with the parallelism. Therefore, 3. But he is a Jew (this is brought over from the preceding verse) who is a Jew inwardly; and circumcision (likewise brought over from the preceding) is circumcision of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter. We must therefore supply after , and after .A Jew in secret, . The true theocratic dispositionthat is, the direction of legality to heartiness, truth, and reality, and thus to the New Testament. This is not quite equal in degree to (1Pe 3:4). Circumcision of the heart; see Deu 10:16, &c.; Philo: . Circumcision of the heart does not mean the separation of every thing immoral from the inner life (Meyer), but the mortification or breaking of the natural selfish principle of life, by faith, as the principle of theocratic consecration and direction. [Even the Old Testament plainly teaches the spiritual import of circumcision, and demands the circumcision of the heart, without which the external ceremony is worthless; Deu 10:16; Deu 30:6; Jer 4:4; Jer 9:29; Eze 44:9; comp. Col 2:11; Php 3:2. The same may be applied to baptism, the sign and seal of regeneration.P. S.]In the spirit. Explanations: 1. In the Holy Spirit (Meyer, Fritzsche, Philippi [Hodge]). Incorrect, since the question is not yet concerning the Christian new birth. 2. In the spirit of man (cumenius, Erasmus, Beza, Reiche, and others). [Wordsworth: the inner man as opposed to the flesh.P. S.] 3. The Divine spirit, as Rom 7:6; 2Co 3:6; the spirit which fills the heart of the true Jew (Calvin, De Wette; the true spirit of the Jewish Church coming from God; Tholuck). 4. The new principle of life wrought by God in man (Rckert). 5. When is placed in antithesis to , or the life to the life that is, the life in an external, slavish, contracted pursuit of the single and outward prescriptions of the law according to the letterthen by spirit we are neither to understand the Spirit of God in itself, nor the spirit of man, but the spirit as life, the spirit-form of the inward life, by which the human spirit, moves in the Spirit of God, and the Spirit of God in the human spirit.Whose praise. Explanations of the : 1. neuter; cujus rei (Luther, Camerarius, Meyer: ideal Judaism and ideal circumcision [Wordsworth]). 2. More fitly: masculine; reference to (Augustine, and others, Tholuck, De Wette [Alford, Hodge]). , Joh 5:44; Joh 12:43. The expression, according to Rom 13:3 and 1Pe 2:14, is often a judicial term (Tholuck). The Apostle here declares not only that the genuine Jewish disposition of pious Jews and Gentiles is far exalted above every praise from below, and enjoys the approbation of God, but also that its honor comes from God, and will therefore be sanctioned by God by a judicial actwhich can at last be nothing else but justification by faith. To Judah it was said, as the explanation of his name: Thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise. But God Himself will praise this genuine spiritual Judah.
Second Paragraph, Rom 3:1-8
Rom 3:1. What then is the advantage of the Jew [ ]? After the Apostle has shown that not only the Jews are included in the same corruption with the Gentiles, but that pious Gentiles have even an advantage over ungodly Jews, he comes to the question which would naturally be presented to himwhether, then, Israel has any peculiar prerogative, and, if so, in ,what it consists. He does not ask in the name of a Gentile Christian (Seb. Schmid), or of the Judaist, although he must take from these every occasion for accusation, but from the standpoint of the true theocracy. The advantage in the sense of profit (De Wette).Or what is the benefit of circumcision ( )? The second question does not relate merely to circumcision as, a single means of grace (De Wette). It makes the first question more precise, so far as for the Apostle the Jewish economy is different from the Old Testament in general (chap. 4; Galatians 3).
Rom 3:2. Much every way. First of all, namely. [ refers to both and ; Meyer. , under every moral and religious aspect, whichever way you look at it; the opposite is .P. S.] All that he could have in mind he shows in Rom 9:4. But from the outset, apart from his train of thought and purpose, he had a further object than to show the advantage that to them the were committed. We therefore accept, with Theodoret, Calvin, Bengel, and others, that means here prcipuum, or primarium illud est, first of all. Tholuck and Meyer [Alford, Hodge], on the other hand, suppose that he omitted to enumerate the other points (to which the refers), and quote, as examples, Rom 1:8; 1Co 11:18.They were intrusted with the oracles of God. According to our rendering of the , (significant promulgations, , words of revelation, Act 7:38; Heb 5:12; 1Pe 4:11) can by no means denote the Old Testament word of God in its general aspect (Cocceius: quidquid Deus, habuit dicendum), but this word only in the specific direction in which the most of the Jews were unbelieving in respect to it. What is meant, therefore, is not the law alone and as such (Theodoret, cumenius, Beza); for the law, according to Paul, was also a typical gospel (which Tholuck seems to overlook, when he says: The contents of the divide into the twofold part, and at ); nor the Messianic prophecies alone (Grotius, Tholuck, Meyer), but properly both (De Wette), as one was the condition of the other, and both constituted a covenant of Jehovah with the people (Calvin, Calov [Hodge], and others). The unity of these elements lay chiefly in the patriarchal promises; and as the people of Israel were made a covenant people, these were committed to them as the oracles of God establishing the covenant, which Israel, as the servant of God, should proclaim to the nations at the proper time. [The Apostle, in calling the Old Testament Scriptures the oracles of God, clearly recognizes them as divinely inspired books. The Jewish Church was the trustee and guardian of these oracles till the coming of Christ. Now, the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are committed to the guardianship of the Christian Church.P. S.] . They were entrusted with. in the passive; comp. Winer, 40, 1 [ 39, 1, p. 244, 7th ed.; also Gal 2:7; 1Co 9:17.P. S.] They were federally entrusted by the faithfulness of God (, Rom 3:3) with Gods promises, or were authenticated in their faith in order that they might exercise it with fidelity to faith.
Rom 3:3. What then? If some were faithless, &c. In these words the Apostle intimates that the Jews, in the main, still have the advantage just mentioned. The statement is therefore neither an objection nor a proof, but it establishes the previous point against doubt. In view of the certain fulfilment of the Divine promise, even the mass of the apostate people is only a poor crowd of individuals, some; though these some may grammatically be many. Meyer, taking ground against Tholuck and Philippi, disputes the contemptuous and ironical character of the expression . The contempt and irony lies, of course, not in the word, but in the idea. Unbelief has scattered and divided Israel. According to De Wette and Fritzsche, the expression has an alleviating character. Since the great mass of the unbelievers was known to the readers, the expression has rather a palpable sharpness. Meyers translation: If many did refuse to believe (Glaube), their unbelief (Unglaube) will not annul the credibility (Glaubhaftigkeit) of God, expresses the correspondence of the different designations, but it is not satisfactory to the sense. The Apostle forces us, by the , to bring into prominence here the moral force of ; and the assertion of Meyer, that and mean always, in the New Testament, unbelief, not unfaithfulness, rests upon a false alternative.24 Kllner refers the to the unfaithfulness of the Jews in the ante-Christian time. De Wette likewise: They have been unfaithful in keeping the covenant (Theodoret, cumenius, Calvin, and others); not, they have been unbelieving toward the promises and the gospel (Tholuck, Olshausen, Meyer). This view is very strange, since he correctly observes that in the word there lie two meanings; as is at the same time fidelity and faith. Meyers objection to De Wette is equally strange: would be altogether unsuited, for the very reason that it would not be true. All were disobedient and unfaithful. This is against history and the declarations of the Bible (see the discourse of Stephen, Acts 7.). If we distinguish between the ideas, to be a, sinner and to be an apostate, then it follows that, according to the Scriptures, the numerical majority of apostates was always offset by a dynamical majority of persons faithful to the covenant, by whom the covenant was continued on the ground of the ; and it would have been very strange if Paul, in view of this oft-repeated history, which was first really consummated in his time, should have quite ignored the present. But as elsewhere (for example, Joh 8:30) means, they became believers, so is here, they have become unbelieving, not, they have been. The of God is His fidelity; His fidelity to the covenant certainly involves credibility. (2Ti 2:13; , 1Co 1:9; 1Co 10:13, &c.)
Rom 3:4. Let it not be, . [Comp. Textual Note6.] This expression of impassioned repulsion [solemn and intense deprecation], also common to the later Greeks, is, in the mouth of the Hebrew (, ad profana), at the same time an expression of a religious or moral repugnance or aversion. Therefore the Apostle repels the thought, as if the could annul the of God, and therefore also nullify the realization of the eternal covenant of grace in the heart of Israel and in a New Testament people of God.But let it be: God (is) true, but every man false. [Lange: So aber seis: Gott ist wahrhaftig, jeder Mensch aber falsch.] Since relates to one sentence, the antithetical must relate to the sentence which offsets it, and must be marked, as announcing a declaration, by a colon. According to Meyer and De Wette, it means logice , or (Theophylact). [Tholuck prefers as equivalent.] But then the term would have been unfitly chosen. Koppe explains: Much rather let it be (viehlmehr so sei es). Meyer objects that in this case we should expect or as article before the whole sentence, and remarks, that Paul did not design to introduce any sentence from the Old Testament. But Paul can nevertheless make use of a sentence of his own on the future of Israel, and the want of the does not outweigh the consideration that the , as the antithesis of , requires a formal declaration. Moreover, Psa 116:11 (all men are liars) furnished already one half, and the connection the other half of the declaration. This point was to be unfolded in all its amplitude in the history of the New Testament. See 2Ti 2:13. [I prefer to connect ) (Paul does not say, ) with , and to take it in the subjective sense: Let God become, i.e., be seen and acknowledged, even by His enemies, as true, whatever be the consequences. So also the E. V. and the best English commentators. The parallel, 2Ti 2:13, is striking: If we are unfaithful (), yet He abideth faithful (): He cannot deny Himself. Comp. also the phrase: fiat justitia, pereat mundus.P. S.]God is true [according to Dr. Langes view, which disconnects from ]. According to Tholuck, here comprehends practical and theoretical truth; in opposition to what he denotes as the usual exposition, that the Apostle expresses the wish that God would reveal Himself continually as true and faithful (according to Cocceius, in the counsels of his plan of salvation). If the question is on the truth of God in reference to the apparent collision between the Old and New Testaments, then the sense must be that even in this powerful antithesis, which to the view of man appears to be an irreconcilable contradiction, God will remain consistent with Himself, and therefore be truthful and faithful (see 2Co 1:20; Rev 3:14; the name Jehovah). All men are liars so far as they are sinners (sin = lie); yet unbelief is emphatically a lie (Joh 8:44), since, with its rejection of the truth, it becomes obedient to falsehood, and is implicated in the grossest self-contradictions (see Rom 2:21-23). Unbelief is not only a characteristic of apostates, but also a tendency and manifold fault of believers; and so far all men are liars through unbelief. Whenever the covenant between God and man is shaken or broken, absolute faithfulness is always found on Gods side; He is a rock (Deu 32:31, &c.), while all the vibrations, as well as all the breaches of faithfulness, are on the side of men. Also, in Psa 116:11, all men are represented as liars, in opposition to the faithfulness of God; and by troubling believers they oppose faith.
As it is written (Psa 51:4).The application of the passage quoted from the Psalms gives evidence of the most profound insight. The original, according to Hupfelds translation, reads thus:
To Thee alone I have sinned,
And done what is wicked in Thy sight.
In order that Thou mayest be just in Thy sayings,
Pure25 in Thy judging.
The Septuagint translates, In order that Thou mayest be acknowledged just () in Thy words (in Thy sayings), and mayest conquer (, instead of ) in Thy (). Paul quotes from the Septuagint. The sense of the original text is, that David placed himself before the judgment of God and His revelation. Viewed according to the custom of Oriental despots, Nathan had condemned him too harshly; but when he regarded his sin in all its depths as a sin against God, and before His eyes, he perceived the justice of the prophets charge, and the holiness of his judicial declaration of the guilt of death. The translation of the Septuagint, that Thou mayest be justified, declared just [ for the Hebrew ], is exegetical. [In using the word here evidently, like the hiphil of , in a declaratory sense (for God is just and cannot be made just, but only declared or acknowledged as just), Paul furnishes us the key to the proper understanding of his doctrine of justification by faith, see below, Rom 3:28.P. S.] The change , &c., is a periphrasis. Thou mayest be pure in Thy judgment, means properly, Thou wilt be recognized as pure; therefore Thou overcomest, since Thou wilt be justified in Thy judgment. The Septuagint has amplified the slight antithesis, in Thy sayings, in Thy judgment, so that the distinction can be drawn between Gods word and His judgment. The chief point is the canon: If God is to be thoroughly known and recognized as just and holy in His word and in His judgment, then must sin, which stands committed against Him, be known in all its breadth and depth. The defect in our knowledge here is what casts a shade in part upon Gods word and in part upon. His judicial government. Pauls employment of the quotation from the Psalms corresponds to this canon; much sooner shall all men be liars, than that a shadow be cast on Gods truth or fidelity to His covenant. The is frequently used in the judicial sense (see Meyer). Beza, Piscat., and recently Tholuck and Philippi [also Meyer and Ewald.], would take in the middle sense, for to litigate. But the Apostle could not expect that his expression would be understood in any other sense than in the Septuagint. [Comp., however, Textual Note7.P. S.]
[That thou mayest, , , in Psa 51:6 (Rom 3:4 in the E. V.), to the intent that, in order that (). This seems to mean that God caused Davids sins to take this aggravated form for the very purpose that He might appear to be entirely just, when He pronounced condemnation of it. But such an interpretation would imply the contradiction that God condemns His own act. Hence most commentators (even Calvin) take here, and often, like and in the New Testament, of the effect or consequence () = so that. But and grammatically always, or nearly always, indicate the design or purpose (see Gesen., Thes., s. v., and Winer, Gramm., p. 426 ff., 7th ed.); and where this seems inapplicable, as here, we must assume a logical rather than a grammatical latitude. Design and effect often coincide. The Bible no doubt teaches the absolute sovereignty of God, yet never in a fatalistic or pantheistic sense so as to exclude the personal freedom and responsibility of man. Hence it represents, for instance, the hardening of Pharaohs heart, as the judicial act and punishment of God (Exo 4:21; Exo 7:3), and at the same time as Pharaohs own act and guilt (Exo 9:34). David certainly could not mean to say that he sinned with the intention of glorifying Godwhich would have destroyed the sincerity of his repentance, and exposed him to the just condemnation of Paul in Rom 3:8but that his sin was overruled by God for the greater manifestation of His justice. God never does evil, nor wills any man to do evil, in order that good may come out of it, but He exercises His power, wisdom, and love in overruling all evil for good. It is not the sinner who glorifies God through his sin, but God who glorifies Himself through the sinner. Comp. also the remarks of Hupfeld and Hengstenberg on Psa 51:6.P. S.]
Rom 3:5. But if our unrighteousness, &c. [A new objection which might be suggested by the in Rom 3:4; namely, if mans sin redounds to the glory of God, and sets His righteousness in a clearer light (as in the case of David), it is a means to a good end, and hence it ought not to be punished. Paul admits the premise, but denies the conclusion, Rom 3:6.P. S.] Meyer takes here in a very general and comprehensive sense, without regard to the legal element contained in it, and explains: an abnormal ethical disposition.26 By this definition the wicked, the unholy, the bad, can be denoted; but unrighteousness is misconduct in opposition to the law and the right. On , see the Lexica; also Rom 5:8 ; 2Co 7:11, &c. [also Textual Note8].
What shall we say? . A form which often occurs in Paul (Rom 4:1; Rom 6:1, &c.). It is peculiar to rabbinical dialectics, and is very common in the Talmud (quid est dicendum27). It is a formula of meditation on a difficulty, a problem, in which there is danger of a false conclusion. It was also in use among the classics. [See Tholuck.] The sentence, if our unrighteousness, &c, is true, but the following conclusion is rejected as false. The Apostle certainly assumes that an unbelieving Jew could raise this objection, but he makes it himself. This is evident, first, from the interrogative form; second, from the position of the question in such a manner that a negative answer is expected;28 third, from the addition: humanly speaking, . his expression is common among the rabbis, as men speak (see Tholuck); the term [humane loqui] also occurs in the classics [see the examples quoted by Tholuck]. The expression ., resting on the antithesis between God and man, denotes, with Paul, now the opposition between the common sinful conduct and opinions of men, and the conduct and opinions in the light of revelation; and now the opposition between common human rights and customs and the theocratic rights (Gal 3:15, and other places). From this addition it does not follow that the question, , must be regarded as affirmative (see Meyer, against Philippi). [The phrase proves nothing against inspiration. The Apostle here puts himself into the place of other men, using their thoughts and arguments, but expressly rejecting them.P. S.]
Rom 3:6. For then how shall God judge the world? This does not mean: God would then not be able to judge the world; but, according to the usual explanation: Since it is universally agreed among religious people that God will be the Judge of the world, the conclusion alluded to must be rejected. The argument is therefore a reductio ad absurdum.29 (Rckert: the proof is weak!) Cocceius [Reiche], Olshausen, and others, refer (according to rabbinical usage of language) to the Gentile world, and the proof is thus conceived: Even Gentile idolatry must bring to light the glory of the true God; and yet God will judge the Gentile world. Therefore the unbelief of some Jews cannot escape the judgment, even though their unrighteousness corroborates the righteousness of God. But there is no proper foundation for this explanation in the text; and besides, it would only remove a smaller difficulty by a greater one, and in a way that would commend itself only to Jewish prejudice. The New Testament idea of the general judgment is universal. Even the antithesis of and cannot be applied here. With the usual explanation (Tholuck, Meyer, and others) it may nevertheless be asked, whether a sentence which has been dismissed with , stands in further need of a proof. According to our construction, the sentence can also be explanatory, and stand in connection with the following (see below).
Rom 3:7-8. But if the truth of God, &c. The objection of Rom 3:7 appears only to repeat that of Rom 3:5; therefore it is difficult to connect it with what precedes. The difficulty is solved as follows: (1) Calvin, Beza, Grotius [Bengel, Rckert], Philippi, and others think that the objection of Rom 3:5 is only continued and established in Rom 3:7; and the words to (Rom 3:6) should be read, according to Philippi, parenthetically, as a preliminary outburst of apostolic indignation. By this means, the dialectics assume the shape of an involved controversy, in which the Apostle prematurely interrupts the opponent. Tholuck believes that he can produce similar examples in proof of this (Rom 7:25, and Gal 3:3-4). (2) Meyer: The (Rom 3:6) is now confirmed thus: The fact already considered (Rom 3:4 f.), that Gods truth is glorified by the lie of man, removes every ground for supposing that an unrighteous God (sic!), who is to judge the world, will judge man as a sinner, &c. Apart from the quaint construction of the thought, the true statement in Rom 3:5 would be treated as untrue. [De Wette, Alford, Hodge, though differing somewhat in detail, likewise regard Rom 3:7-8 as the amplification and confirmation of the answer given in Rom 3:6 to the objection stated in Rom 3:5. If this objection be valid, then not only may every sinner claim exemption, but it would follow that it is right to do evil that good may come. This is certainly a more easy and natural connection than the one under (1), and best explains the . But if we read , we must regard Rom 3:7 as introducing a new objection, as in a dialogue between the Apostle and an interlocutoran objection which is indignantly resented by Paul as a blasphemous slander. But see the remarks under the next heads.P. S.] (3) Even if we find here, according to Thodoret, the language of a Jew in dispute with the Apostle, the sentence does not appear to be the continuation of the thought of Rom 3:5. Then the Jew has first drawn the conclusion from Rom 3:5. that God is unjust if He punish sins by which He is glorified. Here he would deduce the conclusion, from Rom 3:4, that the man, who by his contributes to the glory of God, is neither a sinner, nor punishable; rather, that he may do evil that good may come. Thus two cases, which would constitute a parallel to Rom 2:3-4the first case denoting fanaticism, the other, antinomianism. But there are considerations presented by the text itself against this view. First, the at the beginning of Rom 3:7; which, for this reason, has been removed by many Codd. (B. D., &c., the Vulgate, &c.) as an impediment to the proper understanding of the passage. Then the aorist, , which Meyer thinks should be understood from the standpoint of the general judgment (Tholuck regards it as present, with Luther). Further, Meyer must interpolate a before the in Rom 3:8 ( , quidni?). Also, if Paul be not permitted to speak in the name of the unbelieving Jew and interrupt himself, an must stand before . We are therefore of the opinion that the hypothesis of the interlocution of the obstinate Jew is not correct. (4) Our explanation is contained already in the translation. [See Textual Notes10and 11.] The Apostle says first, God does not declare wrath on all who have glorified his faithfulness by their unfaithfulness. Granted that His covenant faithfulness has by means of my unfaithfulness, shown itself more powerful and conspicuous to His glory (Rom 5:8), that is, that I have finally become a believerhow? am I also still judged as a sinner? Answer: No. And therefore we would by no means continue in unbelief, as those in Rom 3:3, in order, by wicked conduct, to accomplish a good purpose, Gods glorywhich is the principle laid by some to our charge. Men who act thus (and the do act thus) are justly condemned. Here the of God is the agent, and is the object. In Rom 3:5 there was the reverse, the of man being the agent, and Gods righteousness the object. In Rom 3:7 the question is concerning the predominance or conquest (see Rom 5:20) on the side of the for the honor of God; in Rom 3:5, the question is merely concerning the bringing of the truth to light. The solution of the difficulty lies in the .On the different explanations of , see Tholuck. I as well as others [De Wette, Alford]; even I, a Jew [Bengel]; even I, a Gentile [Coccej., Olshausen]; even I, Paul [Fritzsche]; even I, who have added to the glorification of God [De Wette, Tholuck].
Rom 3:8. [As we are blasphemously (not, slanderously) reported. The blasphemy refers not only to Paul, but in the last instance to God, whose holy and righteous character is outraged by the impious maxim, to do evil that good may come.]In reference to the , we must observe that, in consequence of attraction, the is united with .The leads us to conclude that the Jews charged the Apostle, or the Christians in general, with the alleged principle: The end sanctifies the means (Tholuck, Calvin). Usual acceptation: the doctrine of superabounding mercy (Rom 5:20) is meant (see Tholuck). Meyer: The labors of the Apostle among the Gentiles could occasion such slanders on the part of the Jews. According to the view of the Jews, the Christians converted the Gentile world to Monotheism, by betraying and corrupting the covenant of the Jews.Whose condemnation is just. The does not refer directly to the slanderers as such, since this is an accessory notion, but to the principle, let us do evil that good may come, and to the fact lying at its root, the hardness of the Jews in unfaithfulness, as they more clearly showed the covenant faithfulness of God. But, indirectly, the charge of those slanderers is also answered at the same time. Rom 3:7 favors our explanation. [ refers to the subject in , to those who speak and act according to this pernicious and blasphemous maxim.P. S.]
Third Paragraph, Rom 3:9-20
The transition of the covenant of law to the covenant of grace is already indicated in the preceding paragraph. This is brought to pass in part by the constant unfaithfulness of individuals, and in part by the transitory unfaithfulness of others. In every case Israels sin is manifested in this covenant.
Rom 3:9. What then? It must not be read, with cumenius [Koppe, Hofmann, Th. Schott], , [omitting the interrogation sign after ]; against which is the . The introduction of the result refers to the foregoing section under the point of view that Israel certainly has advantages on the objective side, but none on the subjective. This is now extended further. . Explanations: 1. The middle voice here has the signification of the active: Have we [the Jews] the preference? do we excel? have we an advantage? (Theophylact, cumenius, the old commentators in general.) Also De Wette, who says: This is the only suitable sense.30 Therefore the reading . Meyer urges against this view: (a.) The usage of language;31 (b) the previous admission of Israels advantage [Rom 3:2, , which seems to conflict with , Rom 3:9.P. S.]. 2. The middle voice in the signification of: to hold before, to hold for ones protection. Hemsterhuys, Venema, &c. (Fritzsche, figuratively: Do we need a pretext?) Meyer: Have we a protection? That is, have we something with which to defend or screen ourselves? Against this, Tholuck raises the objection that the verb, in this case, should have an accusative. [Have we any thing for a pretext? Answer: Nothing (instead of: Not at all, not in the least).P. S.] 3. The passive construction (cumenius II, Wetstein, Storr). [cumenius takes the word as the question of a Gentile: Are we surpassed by the Jews? Wetstein, as the question of a Jew: Are we surpassed by the Gentiles? Reiche and Olshausen: Are we preferred by God? This last form of the passive rendering agrees, as to sense, with the active rendering sub No. 1. But the Apostle is not speaking here of Gods favor, but of mans sin, and shows that the Jews, though highly favored by God, are yet subjectively no better, and even more guilty, than the Gentiles.P. S.] 4. The middle form was most easily applicable to the intransitive, to be prominent, to excel; therefore we translate, Are we ahead, or, better? Tholuck properly calls to mind that so many of the Greek fathers have taken no exception to the middle form. It is quite against the context when Olshausen [?] and Reiche read the word as a question of the Gentiles (shall we be preferred?). , Not in the least. Grotius, and others [Wetstein, Kllner], literally: not altogether, not in all respects [as in 1Co 5:10, where limits the prohibition.P. S.] This is contrary to the context. [For the Apostle proves the absolute equality of guilt before the law. , is here = , 1Co 16:12; strengthens the negation, no, in no wise; not at all; (Theophylact); nequaquam (Vulgate); durchaus nicht; nein, ganz und gar, i.e., nein, in keiner Weise, keineswegs. This sense was probably indicated by the emphatic pronunciation of , and a stop after . In 1Co 5:10, on the contrary, the , non omnino, limits the prohibition contained in . Comp. Winer, p. 516, and Meyer in loc.P. S.]For we have before charged, . Namely, in the previous part of the Epistle [i. 18 ff., with reference to the Gentiles; Rom 2:1 ff., with reference to the Jews.P. S.]. The [from , motive, reason, and in a forensic sense, charge, ground of accusation] is a compound word without example.32Under sin [ ]. Not merely, are sinners (Fritzsche). Meyer: are governed by sin. He denies, against Hofmann, that the question here is concerning the punishableness or guilt of sin [which is to be inferred afterwards from the fact of ]. But this is implied in . The is the ground of the charge.
Rom 3:10-19. As it is written. [ occurs nineteen times in this Epistle.P. S.] Paul had previously proved the guilt of the Jews from their living experience, with only a general allusion to the Scriptures; he now confirms his declaration in the strongest way by Scripture proofs. Under the presupposition of exact knowledge of the Old Testament, rabbinical writers also connect various testimonies without specifying the place where they may be found. At the head there stands Psa 14:1-3, from Rom 3:10 to Rom 3:12, where we have a description of universal sinfulness as well of the Jews as of the Gentiles. There then follows a combination from Psa 5:9; Psa 140:3 and Psa 10:7, in Rom 3:13-14, as a description of sins of the tongue. Then Isa 59:7-8, quoted in Rom 3:16-17, as a delineation of sins of commission. Finally, Psa 36:1, in Rom 3:18, as a characterization of the want of the fear of God lying at the root of all.33 The quotations are free recollections and applications from the Septuagint [yet with several deviations]. Finally, in Rom 3:19, there follows the explanation that these charges were throughout just as applicable to the Jews as to the Gentiles, and indeed chiefly to the Jews. [The passages quoted describe the moral corruption of the times of David and the prophets, but indirectly of all times since human nature is essentially the same always and everywhere. In Psalms 14 the general application is most obvious, and hence it is quoted first.P. S.]
Rom 3:10. There is none righteous. [Paul uses for , LXX.: , doer of good.] Refers the of the Septuagint to the law. The want of righteousness is the inscription of the whole; not as Pauls word (Kllner, &c.), but as free quotation from Psalms 14.
Rom 3:11. There is none that understandeth. While 34 represents the receptivity of the religious understanding, 35 denotes the desire and effort of the spirit. See the original text, where the negation is characterized as Gods fruitless request. [See Textual Note14.]
Rom 3:12. They are all gone out of the way (; ).The , down to one incl. [A Hebraism, , for , not so much as one. Comp. the Latin ad unum omnes, which likewise includes all.P. S.]
Rom 3:13. An open sepulchre. Estius [Bengel, Tholuck, Hodge]: breathing out the noxious odor of corruption. Meyer prefers the meaning: As rapacious and insatiable as a grave which awaits the corpse; in this sense, the quiver of the Chaldeans is called an open sepulchre, Jer 5:16i.e., destructive (also Calvin, and others). But thus Rom 3:15 would be anticipated.They have used deceit. The imperfect 36 denotes continuous action; they have become deceivers for the future; that this is their settled character.The poison of asps. Behind the cunning of falsehood there is deadly malice.
Rom 3:14. Full of cursing. The gross, passionate form of ungodly speech, alternating with doubletongued, false language. The bitterness or animosity of their hateful selfishness is the standing ground of their cursing. [Paul here condenses the translation of the Septuagint, omitting the deceit, as he had already mentioned it in Rom 3:13.P. S.]
Rom 3:15-17. Their feet are swift. The symbol of their excited course of conduct. [On the slightest provocation they commit murder. Paul here again condenses the sense of Isa 59:7.] Their many different ways, full of destruction [, literally, concussion, bruising together, then calamity, destruction] and misery [], (destruction the cause, misery the result) are, as the ways of war of all against all, contrasted with the one way of peace []. By this we must undoubtedly understand not merely a way in which they should enjoy peace (Meyer), but an objective way of peace in which they should become the children of peace. [The way that leads to peace, in opposition to the ways which lead to ruin and misery.] , Grotius: Hebris nescire aliquis dicitur, quod non curat (Jer 4:22).
[Rom 3:18. This quotation from Psa 36:1 goes back to the fountain of the various sins enumerated. The fear of God, or piety, is the beginning of wisdom and the mother of virtue; the want of that fear, or impiety, is the beginning of folly and the mother of vice.P. S.]
Rom 3:19. Now we know. The Jews, indeed, would not readily admit this, but were inclined to refer such declarations exclusively to the Gentiles. [But the passages above quoted from the Psalms and the Prophets, speak not of heathen as heathen, but of fallen men as such, and therefore are applicable to Jews as well.P. S.]The law. This is the Old Testament, especially in its legal relation [as a norm or rule to which they should conform their faith and conduct; Joh 10:34, where our Lord quotes a Psalm as in the law, and other passages].Who are under the law. That is, the Jews; also particularly from the legal standpoint. Calov and others have understood, by the law, the law as distinguished from the gospel; and the expression, those who are under the law, as meaning all men. But this is application, not explanation.That every mouth may be stopped. On the question whether may be understood [so that, instead of in order that], see Tholuck and Meyer. Here it evidently designates the one purpose of the law, to produce the knowledge of sin, but other purposes are not excluded. The (Psa 107:42) means, in a religious relation, that it represents men as at the tribunal of Divine justice; so that they cannot answer God one of a thousand.The whole world. [Not to be restricted, with Grotius: maxima pars hominum, but all men, Jews as well as Gentiles.] Paul has already declared this of the heathen portion in Rom 1:20; Rom 1:32.[Should become (), in their own conviction, guilty, subject to justice. = , , , i.e., not only guilty, but convicted of guilt, and therefore obnoxious to punishment (straffllig).Before God, to whom satisfaction for sin is due.P. S.]
Rom 3:20.37 Because (Desshalb weil). Since can be propterea quod (because) as well as propterea (therefore), Tholuck [with Beza and Morus] prefers propterea, the conclusive form. But the Apostle here goes farther out, and comes to that universal condemnatory judgment of the law. [See Textual Note 20.]
By works of the law. Explanations of :
1. The ritual law (Theodoret, Pelagius, Cornelius a Lapide, Semler, Ammon, and others).38 On the contrary, Augustine39 and Thomas Aquinas already referred to the concluding sentence of the verse: by the law comes knowledge of sin. Paul, moreover, understands the word law throughout in its totality, although he does not ignore its several parts and differences. [The decalogue is merely the quintessence of the whole law. The antithesis is not: the ceremonial law and the moral law, but: works of the law and works of faith.P. S.]
2. The Mosaic law alone [but as a whole, both moral and ritual] is meant (Meyer). [So also Philippi: the whole revealed law as an undivided unity, yet with special regard to the moral law.P. S.] But against this is, that Paul speaks here, and in the previous verse, of the guilt of all men before the law.
3. De Wette accepts it as merely the moral law, and not also the ritual law. The works of the law, as they were performed by the Jews, and would also have been performed by the Gentiles, if they had been placed under the law (Rckert).
4. The law in a deeper and more general sense, as it was written not only on the Decalogue, but also in the heart of the Gentiles, and embracing moral deeds of both Gentiles and Jews (Tholuck [also Storr, Flatt, Stuart]). Certainly it is plain from the context, that the Jewish here represents a universal legislation. [The Apostle includes the Gentiles as well as the Jews under the sentence of condemnation, because they do not come up to their own standard of virtue, as required by their inner law of conscience; Rom 2:15.P. S.]
But what are works of the law [ ]? Explanations:
1. Works produced by the law, without the impulse of the Holy Spirit [ as genetivus auctoris or caus]. So especially Roman Catholic expositors, as Bellarmine [Augustine, Thomas Aquinas]; and also some Protestants, as Usteri, Neander, Philippi [Olshausen, Hofmann, even Luther; see Tholuck, p. 137]. Philippi: Not the works which the law commandsfor he who does these is really righteous (Rom 2:13)but those which the law effects (or which the man who is under the law is able by its aid to bring forth). The deeds of the law are (Heb 6:1); the cannot [Gal 3:21], although it is complete in its method and destination. On Luthers distinction between doing the works of the law and fulfilling the law itself, see Tholuck.
2. The deeds required or prescribed by the law. Protestant expositors, e.g., Gerhard, who includes also the bona opera ratione objecti. [So also Melanchthon, Calvin, Beza, Rckert, Fritzsche, De Wette, Meyer, Hodge. In this view, the include all good works, those after regeneration as well as those before. Even Abraham, the friend of God, was not justified by his works, but by faith. The law of the Old Testament is holy, just, and good, and demands perfect conformity to the will of God, which is true holiness. But even our best works, done under the gospel and under the influence of Divine grace, are imperfect, and can therefore be no ground of justification. Hence the most holy men of all ages and churches never depend on their own works, but on the work and merits of Christ, for final acceptance with God.P. S.]
3. Tholuck combines the two explanations [p. 140]: The Apostle includes both meanings, so that, in some passages, the meaning of the deeds required by the law, and, in others, that of the deeds produced by the law, appears more prominent. But, from the very nature of the case, the deeds required by the law, and those produced by the law, correspond to each other on the legal standpoint. The unity of both are the works of the legal standpoint, as it may be found also among the heathen (e.g., Creon in the Antigone of Sophocles). The law is, for those subjected to it, an analytical letter, which is related to the external work; but, on the contrary, for those who seek God, it is a synthetical symbol, which is related to the disposition of the heart. The former meaning applies certainly to every man, but only to introduce him to the understanding of its second signification. Those who know it only in the former meaning, always seek justification and , until they are (Rom 2:8), and only become acquainted with an apparent righteousness of a partisan character. So, on the other hand, the , in all their efforts to fulfil the law, are more and more convinced of the impossibility of a righteousness by works. The requirement of the law, therefore, as well as its operation, continually impelsin the moral, still more in the religious sphereby means of the knowledge of sin, far beyond the legal standpoint to faith itself. Therefore the remark frequently made; not as if complete obedience to the law would be insufficient for justification (Meyer), is apt to mislead.[40] De Wette properly remarks: It lies in the nature of man, and of the law, that this is not fulfilled, and consequently that righteousness cannot be obtained (see Jam 2:10). Where the Old Testament Scriptures speak of righteous persons, those are meant who, in their observance of the legal letter, are theoeratically and ecclesiastically irreproachable, but yet do not therein find their comfort (see Luk 1:6).
No flesh. No human being. [With an allusion to our weakness and frailty, as we say: No mortal. The parallel passage in Ps. 183:2 has, instead: no man living.P. S.] Not even the believer. It never occurs to him that he might perfect his justification by faith through dead works. [The phrase is a strong Hebraism,
[Shall (can) be justified, . The future refers not to the day of judgment (Reiche), for justification takes place already in this life; nor to the indefinite, abstract future (Meyer, Philippi: whenever justification shall take place), but to the moral possibility, or impossibility rather (can ever be justified); comp. , Rom 3:6.P. S.]
[On the meaning of , to justify, comp. the Exeg. Notes on Rom 1:17; Rom 2:13; Rom 3:24. It is perfectly plain that here, and in the parallel passage, Gal 2:16, it can only mean, to declare or judicially pronounce just, not, to make just. This appears (1) from Psa 143:2, here referred to (Enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no man living be justified;) (2). from the aim of the passage, which is to confirm by the preceding sentence: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God (Rom 3:19); and (3) from the addition , which represents God as Judge, coram Deo judice.Dr. Wieseler, in his exposition of the parallel passage, Gal 2:16 (Commentar, &c., pp. 176204), enters into an elaborate discussion of the meaning of , of which we will give the substance in English, anticipating in part our own remarks on Rom 3:24 :
The verb has, in the Greek, two fundamental significations:
(1) (cf. , to do any one , harm); that is, to do any one justice. It is used in this sense especially of a judge, and signifies, to determine justice generally; or more specially, according to the result of the judging, on the one hand, to condemn and punish, as with peculiar frequency in the profane writers; or also either to declare guiltless of the charge, or to acknowledge, in the case of any one, the claims of right, which he has; only that the favorable or unfavorable judgment, in this fundamental signification, is always conceived as his , as deserved by him.
(2) , or , to make a thing or person righteous; that is, either to account and declare righteous, or to transfer into the right condition; for the verbs in express also a bringing out into effect that from which the verb is derived; comp. , = and . So does accordingly signify, to account any thing right and equitable, to approve, wish, require; equivalent to .
The biblical usus loquendi of attaches itself to the Hebrew (or ), of which it is commonly the translation in the LXX. This, now, for the most part signifies to declare righteous (judicially, or in common life); but, to make righteous, or, to lead to righteousness, only in Dan 12:3; Isa 53:11.
Even so , in the Septuagint, frequently signifies, to declare righteous judicially; Psa 82:3; Exo 23:7; Deu 25:1; 1Ki 8:32; and in common life also, to acknowledge as righteous, or, to represent as righteous; Eze 16:51-52; and is interchanged in this sense with ; Job 32:2; Job 27:5. On the other hand, it is used with extreme infrequency in the sense, to make righteous, to transfer into the condition of righteousness; Psa 73:13; Isa 53:11; Sir 18:22.
Thus far our examination has afforded the result, that can, it is true, signify also, to make righteous, as well in profane Greek (in this, according to the second fundamental signification), as in the LXX., but that this signification has, in the use of the language, receded decidedly into the background in comparison with the forensic and judicial.
To still less advantage does the signification, to make righteous, appear in the New Testament use. Leaving out of view the passages in question, where a , or , is spoken of, there does not occur a single passage in which the signification to make righteous is found. (Besides the passages mentioned above, the verb occurs Mat 11:19; Luk 7:29; Luk 7:35; Luk 10:29; Rom 3:4; 1Ti 3:16; Rev 22:11.41) This fact cannot but be most unfavorable to the assumption of the signification, to make righteous, in the remaining passages.P. S.]
For by the law (comes) a knowledge of sin. Tholuck would supply only (no more than) a knowledge; but is exact, living, increasing knowledge. The antithesis laid down by Chrysostomthat the law, far from being able to take away sin, only first brings it to knowledgeneeds still the supplementary thought, that it is just this knowledge which is the preliminary condition for the removal of sin. [The law, being the revelation of the holy and perfect will of God, exhibits, by contrast, our own sinfulness, and awakens the desire after salvation. This sentence of Paul, together with his declaration that the law is a to lead to Christ (Gal 3:24-25); contains the whole philosophy of the law, as a moral educator, and is the best and deepest thing that can be said of it. Ewald justly remarks of our passage: Mit diesen Worten trifft Paulas den tiefsten Kern der Sache; i.e., with these words Paul hits the nail on the head, and penetrates to the inmost marrow of the thing. is well explained by Calvin: A contrario ratiocinatur quando ex eadem scatebra non prodeunt vita et mors.P. S.]
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. Rom 2:25-29. The elder theology has properly regarded circumcision as a federal sacrament of the Old Testament, and as the preliminary analogue or type of New Testament baptism; just as the Passover feast was an Old Testament type of the Lords Supper. And thus far did the represent the whole of Judaism, which is proved by the fact that Paul used this term to designate the Jews (see also Gal 5:3). But it is easy to go astray on the biblical meaning of circumcision, as on the law of the Sabbath, if we do not bear in mind that we have to deal with institutions which comprehend many points of view. Thus, the Sabbatic law is first a religious and moral command of God among the Ten Commandments (Exo 20:8 ff.). But it is likewise a religious and liturgical, or Levitical command on worship (according to Lev 23:3). In the latter sense, it is abrogated as a mere Old Testament form, as far as Christians are concerned; or, rather, it has been supplanted by the divine-human creation of a new day of the great congregationthe Lords Day. But the religious and ethical command of the Sabbath in the Decalogue has become a religious and ethical principle, which, in its educating and legal form, has connected itself with Sunday. In the same way is circumcision a synthesis. The foundation of it was a very old, sporadic, oriental custom (Epistle of Barnabas, chap. 942). It was made to Abraham, according to Rom 4:11, a symbolical seal of his faith; which is certainly the sacrament of the covenant of promise. But then Moses also made it, in a more definite sense, an obligation of the law (Exo 4:25; Jos 5:2 ff.). The law was the explication of circumcision, and circumcision was the concentration of the law. While, therefore, the law was annulled in regard to Christians by faith, circumcision was also annulled; or, rather, the New Testament symbol took its place, and the fulfilment of the Abrahamic promisethe new birth of faithwas connected with it. Tholuck thinks (p. 114) it is a contradiction, that, according to the elder theology,43 faith in the Messiah was the condition of the Divine promise in circumcision; while, according to Paul, the fulfilment of the law was this condition. But Paul certainly knew of no other fulfilment of the law than that in the Messianic faith, which became, finally, faith in the Messiah. On p. 117, Tholuck himself refers to the inward character of the requirements of Judaism.
2. The great importance which the Apostle attaches to what is withinto the sentiment of the heartis plain from his bold antitheses. Notwithstanding, his uncircumcision, the Gentile, by virtue of his state of mind, can become a Jew, and vice vers.
3. The witnesses adduced by the Apostle on the universality of corruption in Israel, neither preclude the antithesis in Rom 2:7-8, nor the degrees on both sides.
4. On Rom 3:3. The covenant of God is always perfect according to its stage of development. If it generally fails to become apparent, the fault always turns out to be mans. The covenant of God is surely no contrat socialno agreement between equal parties. It is the free institution of Gods grace. But this institution is that of a true covenant, of a personal and ethical mutual relation; and whenever the hierarchy, or a Romanizing view of the ministry obliterate the ethical obligation on the part of man in order to make the sacraments magical operations, their course leads to the desecration and weakening of the covenant acts.
5. Rom 3:4. For our construction of the passage in Psa 51:4 f., see the Exeg. Notes on Rom 3:4. For another view, see Philippi, p. 81, with reference to Hengstenberg, Psalms, vol. iii., p. 19. [Both take , , in the usual strict sense (, not ), as does also Gesenius, Thes., p. Rom 1052: eum in finem peccavi, ut illustretur justitia tua; and they make the old distinction between the matter of sin, which is mans work, and the form of sin, which is in the hands of God.P. S.] Hupfeld also refers the passage to the holy interest of Gods government in human offences, but at the same time has definitely distinguished the relative divine and human parts. Without contending against the thought per se, we would refer the not to sin itself, but to the perception and knowledge of sin. Hence we infer the proposition: All want of a proper knowledge of sin on the part of man obscures the word of God, and leads to the misconception of His judgments (as in the talk about fanatical ideas of revelation, gloomy destiny, &c.).
6. On the truth of God, see the Exeg. Notes on Rom 3:4.
7. On Rom 3:20. By the law is the knowledge of sin (see Gal 3:24). This purpose of the law excludes neither its usus primus nor the usus tertius.44 But the three usus mark the developing progress of the law from without inwardly, as well in a historical as in a psychological view. The first stage [usus politicus] has also its promise. The Jew who lived according to the law is justified in the tribunal of his priesthood, and has also his earthly blessing (that it may go well with thee, &c.). But the subtilty of the lawnot to speak of its first and last commandmentand its symbolical transparency and spiritualization, impel him, if he be upright, further to the pdagogical standpoint, which looks to Christ. And with this, he receives the whole power for the tertius usus [in regulating his life of faith].
8. While the elder theology separated the three parts of the law (morals, worship, polity) too far from each other, at present the idea of the law as a unit is often so strongly emphasized as to lose sight of the fact that, both in the Old Testament as well as in the New, cognizance is taken of the difference of the parts (see Mat 19:17; Rom 7:7). The view to the unity of the law, however, prevails in the Mosaic and legal understanding of the Old Testament revelation, as represented by the letters of the two tables.
9. The incapacity of the law to make man righteous lies chiefly in this: First, it is a demand on the work of the incapable man, who is flesh (no flesh shall be justified); but it is not a Divine promise and work for establishing a new relation. Then it meets man as a foreign will, another law; by which means his false autonomy is inclined to resistance, because he is alien to himself and to the concurring law within his inward nature. Finally, it meets him in analytical form and separateness. Man only becomes susceptible of Divine influences: 1. As they are founded in the grace and gift of God; 2. in the spontaneous action of voluntary love; 3. in synthetical concentration.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
(From Rom 2:25 to Rom 3:20)
Either, or. As this applied to the Jew according to his position in the Old Testament, so does it apply to the Christian according to his position in the New (Rom 3:25).It is not the external possession of a saving means that produces blessings, but faithfulness in its application (Rom 3:25-29).How the fact, that the Jew becomes a Gentile, and the Gentile a Jew, can be repeated in our time in various contrasts (Rom 3:25-27).The Jew, proud of the letter and of circumcision, below the condemnatory sentence pronounced on the illegal and uncircumcised Gentilea warning for evangelical Christians (Rom 3:27).Inner life in religion; already the principal thing in Judaism, and much more in Christianity (Rom 3:28-29).He who is inwardly pious, receives praise, not of men, but of God.Gods pleasure or praise of inward faithfulness in piety. Herewith it must be seen: 1. How this praise can be acquired; 2. In what does it consist? (Rom 3:29).The praise of men and the praise of God (Rom 3:29).
What advantage have the Jews? This question, and its answer, exhibit to us the infinitely great blessing of Christianity (Rom 3:1-4).How Paul never ignores the historical significance of his people, but triumphantly defends it against every charge (comp. Rom 9:4-5).The historical feeling of the Apostle Paul (Rom 3:1-4).
On Rom 3:2. God has shown His word to Jacob, his statutes and judgments unto Israel (Psa 147:19). Why has God spoken to Israel? 1. Because He chose this people, out of voluntary compassion, for His inheritance; 2. Because by this people, specially appointed by Him for the purpose, He designed to prepare salvation for all the nations of the earth.Do not complain too much at the unbelief of the world! For, 1. The unbelievers always remain in the minority; in real significance, let their number be ever so great; 2. Not only does their unbelief not make the faith (faithfulness) of God without effect; but 3. Rather contributes thereto, by radiantly showing Gods truthfulness, in contrast with all human falsehood (Rom 3:3-4).
On Rom 3:5-8. Why is it impossible that God should have desired our (unrighteousness for His glory? 1. Because God could not then judge the world; 2. Because we would be condemned as sinners by an unjust method.How far does our unrighteousness prove the righteousness of God?God cannot be the author of sin! This was acknowledged, 1. By Abraham, the father of all the faithful (Gen 18:25); 2. By Paul, the Apostle of all the faithful.Through Gods providence, good continually comes out of evil; but we should never say, Let us do evil, that good may come!He who says, Let us do evil, &c., 1. Blasphemes God; and therefore, 2. Receives righteous condemnation.The principle of the Jesuits, that the end sanctifies the means, is nothing else than a hypocritical cloaking of the plain words: Let us do evil, that good may come.
On Rom 3:9-18. The sinfulness of all, both Jews and Greeks: 1. Proved by Paul himself in his description of their moral depravity; 2. Corroborated by the proofs of Holy Scripture from the Psalms, Proverbs of Solomon, and the Prophet Isaiah.As Paul appeals to the Old Testament, so should we, in order to authenticate truths, appeal to the whole Bible, though first and continually to the New Testament.Every doctrine must be scriptural.Paul a master in the application of Scripture: 1. So far as he grasps the fulness of the scriptural expression; but, 2. He does not thoughtlessly arrange quotations from the Scriptures; but, 3. He skilfully connects kindred passages into a beautiful whole.
On Rom 3:18-20. The severe preaching of the law: 1. To whom is it directed? 2. What does it accomplish?How far does the law produce knowledge of sin?
Luther: Spirit is what God supernaturally effects in man; letter is all the deeds of nature without spirit (Rom 2:29).God is a sure support; but he who trusts in man will want (Rom 3:4).David says (Psa 51:4): Against Thee, Thee only, have I sinned, &c. These words would seem to mean that man must sin in order that God might be just, as Paul would also seem here to say. Yet this is not the case; but we shall acknowledge the sin of which God accuses us, that He might thereby be confessed truthful and just in His law.
Starke: A true Christian must not despise the means of grace: as, attending church, making confession, and partaking of the Lords Supper; nor should he speak derisively of them because they are misused by most persons as a false hope (Rom 2:25).He who will be comforted by the consideration that he has been baptized in the name of Christ, must examine himself whether he has also been newly, born, and walks after the new man: where this is not the case, holy baptism is of just as little use to him, as circumcision was to the unbelieving Jew; 1Pe 3:21 (Rom 2:29).In worldly courts, injustice often rules; but God will judge the world in the justest manner (Rom 3:6).When our misery is properly uncovered, compassion is near; and when we are truly compassionate ourselves, compassion is not far from us (Rom 3:12).The way to grace is open when we stand dumb before God (Rom 3:19).There is only one way to salvation, by which men, before, at the time of, and after Moses, can be saved (Rom 3:20).Lange: Oh, how many Christians are put to shame at this day by honorable heathen! And how the latter will rise up against the former on the judgment-day! (Rom 2:26).Hedinger: The new creature must be all in all. If this be not the case, there is no godly sorrow, no faith, no Christ, no hope of salvation (Rom 2:25).There is only one way to salvation, yet God is at perfect liberty to say in what people He will build His Church, and what measure of grace and gifts He will give (Rom 8:2).Here stands the pillar of the evangelical Church, the test and corner-stone of the pure, saving gospel (Rom 3:20).Quesnel: A strong proof of original sin, because no one who comes into the world is righteous, or without sin (Rom 3:10).Let love be in the heart, then will loveliness be also in the mouth (Rom 3:14).Cramer: Learn to distinguish well between true and false Jews, true and false Christians; the external profession does not constitute a true Jew or Christian (Rom 2:28).It is not all gold that glitters, and not all show is wisdom. Although the natural reason can devise many conclusive speeches and subtleties, these must not be regarded as wisdom in divine things (Rom 3:5).Nova Bibl. Tb.: The dead members of the Church depend upon its external advantages, take their comfort in them, and make their boast of them, without remembering that they can derive no good from them without penitence and faith (Rom 3:1).Though we be unfaithful, God remaineth faithful. Oh, let us therefore, rely upon His faithfulness and promise, and take comfort in the fact that we always have a ready entrance to the faithfulness of our God (Rom 3:3).Osiander: If God is truthful, but men false, why do some men believe folly sooner than the word of God? But to God alone belongs the praise of righteousness and truth (Rom 3:4).Those who boast of their righteousness before God, know neither Gods will nor themselves (Rom 3:19).
Gerlach: The usefulness of the covenant of grace extends on all sides and encompasses all the relations of life (Rom 3:2).Gods wisdom, omnipotence, justice, and love, are glorified either in the punishment or conversion of the sinner; the more wicked the sinner, the greater the glory. But this glory consists precisely in the death of the sinner, since he either dies to sin, having once lived to it; or, with all other sinners, suffers eternal death in perdition (Rom 3:4).Description of men of malignant feeling, who strive to injure others by their language. Throat, tongue, and lipsthree instruments of speech, which utter the words from within (Rom 3:13).The more complete and deep the command, the stronger is its declaration of condemnation, and the less can it awaken in us faith and hope for salvation (Rom 3:20).
Lisco: The Christian is aided by the sacraments only when he lives in faith (Rom 2:25).On what the moral worth of man before God depends (Rom 3:25-26).Israels advantages (Rom 3:1-4).He who adopts the principle: Let us sin, that good may come, will receive righteous condemnation; for God desires to be glorified only by our obedience; all disobedience is dishonoring His majesty, but terminates also with the sinners destruction, and likewise extends to the justification or glorification of the holy and righteous God (Rom 3:8).
Heubner: External ecclesiasticism and confession has value only when it leads to religion of the heart and life; otherwise, it is only the same as heathenism (Rom 2:25).[45]The great difference between outward and inward Christianity. True Christianity is internal (Rom 2:28).The true worshipper of God is inward, is concealed from the world, and is known only to God (Rom 2:29).The worth and merit of the pious person is exalted above all opinion of the world: 1. Because true piety by no means passes in the world for the highest good, but only that which is profitable, and shines; 2. Because men cannot discern this inner, pure condition of heart, neither can they credit it to others; 3. Because the world cannot reward this piety (Rom 2:29).Gods word is committed to us; use it aright, support it, propagate it. In many places it has disappeared through the fault of men (in Asia and Africa), Rom 3:2.Gods honor cannot be touched. Nothing can be charged against God; it would be blasphemy to charge Him with blame of any kind (Rom 3:4).Gods righteousness becomes the more apparent in proportion to the manifestation of mans unrighteousness (Rom 3:5).Every feeling of hatred is the root for a willingness to shed blood (Rom 3:15).Every man is guilty before God, and subject to His punishment; but he should also know and confess it (Rom 3:19).The law requires obedience to all its commands (Rom 3:20).
Spener: When people are wickedly taught to sin, so that God may be lauded because of the forgiveness of sins, it is the same slander which the same old slanderous devil charged at that time against the apostles, and which is still cast against the doctrine of the grace of God (Rom 3:8).
Besser: Circumcision of the heart is real circumcision (Rom 2:29).The evangelical theme of joy in the Epistle to the Romans is, that God, in grace, is just in His words to sinners whom He has justified by faith in Jesus (Rom 3:4).
Lange, on Rom 3:16-24. The fearful picture of warning in the fall of the Jews.How this picture was again presented in the Church before the Reformation, and now appears in many forms.
Rom 3:25-29. Comparison of this passage with Mat 23:21-28,The great vindication here for the believerthat God, in His word, confides in him in a certain measure.God, in His faithfulness to His covenant, a rock.How unbelief is against God, and yet must serve Gods purpose.Rom 3:1-8. To have an advantage, and yet not to have one.The testimonies of Scripture on the sinful depravity of man.
Rom 3:8-19. How vain is the effort to be justified by the law: 1. Because by the deeds of the law, &c.; 2. For by the law, &c.
[Burkitt: (condensed) Rom 2:25. The heathen have abused but one talent, the light of nature; but we, thousands; even as many thousands as we have slighted the tenders of offered grace. What a fearful aggravation it puts upon our sin and misery! We must certainly be accountable to God at the great day, not only for all the light we have had, but for all we might have had in the gospel day; and especially for the light we have sinned under and rebelled against.Rom 3:1. Great is that peoples privilege and mercy who enjoy the word of Godthe audible word in the Holy Scriptures, the visible word in the holy sacraments. It enlighteneth the eyes, rejoiceth the heart, quickeneth the soul. It is compared to gold for profit, to honey for sweetness, to milk for nourishing, to food for strengthening!Rom 3:3-7 : God is never intentionally, but is sometimes accidentally glorified by mans sins. There never was such a crime as crucifying Christ, but nothing by which God has reaped greater glory.Rom 3:10. The unrighteousness of man: 1. There is none originally righteous; 2. None efficiently righteous; 3. none meritoriously righteous; 4. None perfectly righteous.Matthew Henry: The Jews had the means of salvation, but they had not the monopoly of it.On the righteousness of God, observe: 1. It is manifested; 2. It is without the law; 3. It is witnessed by the law and the prophets; 4. It is by the faith of Jesus Christ; 5. It is to all, and upon all them that believe.Doddridge: We pity the Gentiles, and justly so; but let us take heed lest those appearances of virtue which are to be found among some of them do not condemn us, who, with the letter of the law and the gospel, and with the solemn tokens of a covenant relation to God, transgress His precepts, and violate out engagements to Him; so turning the means of goodness and happiness into the occasion of more aggravated guilt and misery.Clarke: The law is properly considered the rule of right; and unless God had given some such means of discovering what sin is, the darkened heart of man could never have formed an adequate conception of it. For as an acknowledged straight edge is the only way in which the straightness or crookedness of a line can be determined, so the moral obliquity of human actions can only be determined by the law of God, that rule of right which proceeds from His own immaculate holiness.
[Hodge: When true religion declines, the disposition to lay undue stress on external rites is increased. The Jews, when they lost their spirituality, supposed that circumcision had power to save (Rom 2:25).Paul does not deny, but asserts the value of circumcision. So, likewise, the Christian sacraments, baptism and the Lords Supper, are of the utmost importance, and to neglect or reject them is a great sin (Rom 2:25; Rom 3:1).It is a mark of genuine piety to be disposed always to justify God, and to condemn ourselves. On the other hand, a disposition to self-justification and the examination of our sins, however secret, is an indication of the want of a proper sense of our own unworthiness and of the Divine excellence (Rom 3:4-5).There is no better evidence against the truth of any doctrine, than that its tendency is immoral (Rom 3:8).Speculative and moral truths, which are self-evident to the mind, should be regarded as authoritative, and as fixed points in all reasonings (Rom 3:8).Barnes: If all men were willing to sacrifice their opinions when they appeared to impinge on the veracity of God; if they started back with instinctive shuddering at the very supposition of such a want of fidelity in Him; how soon would it put an end to the boastings of error, to the pride of philosophy, to lofty dictation in religion! No man with this feeling could be a Universalist for a moment; and none could be an infidel.
[On Rom 2:29, see Wesleys sermon The Circumcision of the Heart ; on Rom 3:1-2, Paysons sermon on The Oracles of God ; Melvilles on The Advantages resulting from the Possession of the Scriptures ; and Canon Wordsworths Hulsean Lecture on What is the Foundation of the Canon of the New Testament? On Rom 3:4, see Dwights sermon on God to be Believed rather than Man ; and C. J. Vaughans on The One Necessity. On Rom 3:9-19, see Chalmers sermon on The Importance of Civil Government to Society.J. F. H.]
Footnotes:
[1]Rom 3:2.[ . N. A. D.3K. L., Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford, Lange, insert , namely, after ; B. D.*G., Vulg., Syr., Lachmann, omit it. , first, in the first place, is not followed by secondly, &c.; comp. , Rom 1:8. To avoid the anacoluthon, Calvin translates: prcipue; Beza: primarium illud est. So also the E. V. and Dr. Lange.P. S.]
[2]Rom 3:3.[ ; a phrase used to start an objection for the purpose of answering it, or to vindicate a previous assertion; comp. Php 1:18.P. S.]
[3]Rom 3:3.[, should be rendered so as to retain the paronomasia. Lange: Denn wie? Wenn etliche die Glavbenstreue brechen, sollte ihr Treubruch die Treue Gottes aufheben??P. S.]
[4]Rom 3:4.[Or, Far be it, far from it, by no means; Vulg., absit; German: es werde nicht, or (Luther, Lange), das sei ferne! The phrase, , is an expression of strong denial or pious horror, corresponding to the Hebrew (Gen 44:17; Jos 22:29; 1Sa 20:2), and occurs fourteen times in Pauls Epistlesten times in Romans (Rom 3:4; Rom 3:6; Rom 3:31; Rom 6:2; Rom 6:15; Rom 7:7; Rom 7:13; Rom 9:14; Rom 11:1; Rom 11:11), three times in Galatians (Rom 2:17; Rom 3:21; Rom 6:14), and once in 1Co 6:15; but elsewhere in the N. T. only Luk 20:16. It is also used by Polybius, Arian, and the later Greek writers. The God forbid of the Authorized Version (like the German Gott behtegott bewahre) is almost profane, though very expressive, and in keeping with old English usage; for we find it in all the earlier E. Vv., including that of Wiclif, and also that of Rheims. Wordsworths rendering: Heaven forbid that this should be so, is hardly an improvement. Remember the third commandment, as explained by Christ, Mat 5:31.P. S.]
[5] Rom 3:4.[Or, in Thy judging, when Thou judgest, as the E. V. has it in Psa 51:4. The active rendering of (middle, in the sense of litigare) corresponds to the Hebrew , Psa 51:4 (comp. LXX.; Job 13:19; Isa 43:26; Jer 2:35; Mat 5:40; 1Co 6:1; 1Co 6:6), and is defended in this passage by Beza, Bengel, Tholuck, Meyer, and Ewald; while Vulg., Luther, Lange, Hodge, &c., prefer the passive rendering: when Thou art judged. See Exeg. Notes. The quotation is from the penitential Psalm of David, composed after his double crime of adultery and murder, and reads in Hebrew thus:
Literally:
To Thee, Thee only, I have sinned,
And done the evil in Thine eyes,
In order that Thou mayest be just in Thy speaking,
And pure in Thy judging.
Paul follows the translation of the Septuagint, which renders by (that Thou mayest be justifiedi.e., be accounted, declared just), substitutes (that Thou mayest conquer, prevail judicially in Thy cause) for (be clear, pure), and takes the active in the passive, or more probably in the middle sense, . The sentiment is not materially altered. The apostles, in their citations, frequently depart from the letter of the Hebrew, being careful only to give the mind of the Holy Spirit.P. S.]
[6]Rom 3:5.[, to make stand with, to place together (constituo, colloco); and thence of persons, to introduce, to commend by letter (Rom 16:1; 2Co 3:1); trop., to set forth, to make conspicuous, to prove; so here, and Rom 5:8, … ; 2Co 6:4, ; Gal 2:18, , and often in Polybius, Philo, and Josephus.P. S.]
[7]Rom 3:5.[Cod. Sin.1adds after , His wrath. The other authorities omit it. The article before points to the well-known wrath on the day of judgment, and in the moral government of the world.P. S.]
[8]Rom 3:7.[The usual reading is, ; but Cod. Sin. reads, . Lange, in his translation, reads, wenn nmlich; but in the Exeg. Notes: wenn aber. See his explanation of the difficult passage.P. S.]
[9]Rom 3:8.[Dr. Lange makes a period after come, and translates: And so let us by no meansas we are blasphemously charged, and as some pretend that we saydo evil, that good may come! The condemnation of such is just. See the Exeg. Notes. But nearly all the commentators regard ver 8 as a continuation of the question commenced in Rom 3:7, and assume an irregularity of construction. , then, instead of being connected with () at the beginning of Rom 3:8, is connected by with the preceding . And why do we not rather say, as we are blasphemously reported (), and as some give out that we do say, Let us do the evil things ( ), that the good ones () may come?whose judgment is just.P. S.]
[10]Rom 3:8.[Conybeare and Howson: Of such men the doom is just. occurs twenty-eight times in the N. T. and is generally correctly rendered: judgment, in the E. V. The word damnation, in old English, was used in the sense of condemnation, censure, but is now equivalent to: condemnation to everlasting punishment, or state of everlasting punishment. Hence the E. V. here conveys a false meaning to the popular reader, as also in Rom 13:2 (shall receive to themselves judgment, i.e., here temporal punishment by the magistrate) and 1Co 11:29 (eateth and drinketh judgment to himself).P. S.]
[11]Rom 3:9. is a gloss [D.*G., Syr. On the different interpretations of , comp. the Exeg. Notes. , in the active voice, means: to hold before, or intransitively, to surpass, to excel; in the middle voice: to hold before ones selfeither literally, i.e., a shield, or figuratively, in the sense, to use as a pretext; in the passive voice: to be surpassed.P. S.]
[12] Rom 3:10-12.[Literal version of Psa 14:1-3 from the Hebrew:
A fool hath said in his heart,
There is no God.
They are corrupt,
They have done abominable things,
There is not a doer of good.
Jehovah from the heavens
Hath looked on the children of men,
To see if there is a wise one, seeking God.
The whole have turned aside,
Together they have become worthless:
There is not a doer of good, not even one.P. S.]
[13] Rom 3:13.[Psa 5:9, according to the Hebrew:
There is no stability in their mouth;
Their heart is full of mischief;
An open grave is their throat;
Their tongues they make smooth.P. S.]
[14] Rom 3:13.[Psa 140:3 in Hebrew:
They have sharpened their tongues as a serpent;
Poison of an adder is under their lips.P. S.]
[15] Rom 3:14.[Psa 10:7 :
His mouth is foil of oaths,
And deceit, and fraud.P. S.]
[16] Rom 3:15-17.[From Isa 59:7-8, which reads literally:
Their feet run to do evil,
And they haste to shed innocent blood;
Their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity;
Wasting and destruction are in their highways;
A way of peace they have not known.
And there is no judgment in their paths.
Their paths they have made perverse for themselves;
No treader in it hath known peace.P. S.]
[17] Rom 3:18.[Psa 36:1 :
The transgression of the wicked
Is affirming within my heart:
Fear of God is not before his eyes.P. S.]
[18]Rom 3:20.[ may mean, (1) , propter quod, quam ob rem, quare, wesshalb, wesswegen, on account of which thing, wherefore (relative), or, in the beginning of a period, desshalb, therefore indicating a conclusion from preceding premises. This is the prevailing, though not exclusive meaning, among the Greek classics; while in the N. T. is always used in this sense. (2) , propterea quod, desshalb weil, on this account that, or simply , quia, nam, because, forassigning a reason for a preceding assertion. Both views suit the connection, but the latter is more consistent with the uniform use of this particle in the N. T., and is adopted by the majority of modern commentators, also by Meyer, Lange, Alford, Wordsworth, Hodge. Hence a comma only should be put after . occurs twenty-two times in the N. T. The authorized E. V. translates it eight times for, thirteen times because, and only once thereforeviz., in our passage, following Beza (propterea). See the passages in Schmid-Bruders Concordanti, and in The Englishmans Greek Concordance, and the Textual Note on Rom 1:19.P. S.]
[19]Rom 3:20.[ , probably in allusion to Psa 143:2, LXX.: . The negation belongs not to , but to the verb, according to a Hebraizing syntactic connection. All flesh shall not be justified = nobody shall be justified. Comp. Mat 24:22 : .P. S.]
[20][Rabbi Berechias, in Shemoth Rabb., fol. 138, col. 13: Ne hretici et apostat et impii ex Israelitis dicant: quando quidem circumcisi sumus, in infernum non descendimus. Quid agit Deus S. B.? Mittit angelum et prputia eorum attrahit, ita ut ipsis in infernum descendant. Attrahere, or adducere prpitium, means as much as to obliterate the circumcision, or to become uncircumcised. It was done by apostate Jews at the time of the Maccabees, under the persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes; 1Ma 1:15; Josephus, Antiq. xii. 6, 2. It was a common Jewish opinion, that circumcision, as such saves from hell. Rabbi Menachem (Comm. on the B. of Moses, fol. 43, Colossians 3): Our Rabbins have said, that no circumcised man will see hell. Medrasch Tillin (f. 7, 100:2): God swore to Abraham, that no one who was circumcised should be sent to hell. See these, and similar passages, in Schttgen and Eisenmenger (Entdeckles Judenthum ii. p. 339 f.)P. S.]
[21][The reverse is the case, Joh 8:44 : , where the abstract noun must be supplied from the concrete . Comp. Winer, Gramm., pp. 131, 132, 6th ed.P. S.]
[22][In Rom 3:28 the subject is incomplete, and must be supplied from the predicate thus: [] [ , or, ] , , [] [ ]. In Rom 3:29 the predicate is wanting, and must be inferred from Rom 3:28 thus: [ ], , , [ ]. This is the arrangement of Beza, E. V., De Wette, Tholuck, Alford. Dr. Lange (see Exeg. Notes on Rom 3:29) differs from this only in form, by supplying as predicate after . But Fritzsche and Meyer make Rom 3:29 strictly parallel with Rom 3:28, and take as predicate thus: [] , but he who [is a Jew] inwardly is a Jew [in the true, ideal sense of the word]. This would seem the best arrangement, if it were not for the following: , &c., which Meyer renders: and the circumcision of the heart [is, consists in] the spirit, not in the letter. But a strict parallelism would here require: [sc. ] . Ewald agrees with this structure of Meyer in the first clause, but would make the predicate in the second clause: circumcision [is that] of the heart. This is forced, and would require the article before . The sense is not materially affected by the difference of construction. In this passage the authorized E. V., upon the whole, can scarcely be improved.P. S.]
[23][Tholuck quotes from the Talmud (Niddo, F. 20, 2) the axiom: , Judus in penetralibus cordis.P. S.]
[24][Hodge: That may have the sense to be unfaithful, is plain from 2Ti 2:13, and from the sense of , in Heb 3:12; Heb 3:19, and of , in Luk 12:46; Rev 21:8. To understand the passage as referring to want of faith in Christ, seems inconsistent with the whole context.P. S.]
[25][ indicates the righteousness, (properly, to be pure), the holiness of God.P. S.]
[26][Comp. Hodge: is not to be taken in the restricted sense of injustice, nor as equivalent to , in the preceding verse, but in the comprehensive sense of unrighteousness, wickedness. It is the opposite of , rectitude, righteousness, which includes all moral excellence.P. S.]
[27][. ]
[28][ ; in negative interrogations (, doch nicht?) is used when a negative, (nonne) when a positive answer is expected. See Winer, p. 476; Hartung, Partik. 2:88; and Meyer in loc.; against Rckert and Philippi. Paul does not ask: Is not God unjust? but, Is God unjust? expecting a negative reply; and he apologizes even for putting the question in this form.P. S.]
[29][Calvin: Sumit argumentum ab ipsius Dei officio quo probet id esse impossibile; judicabit Deus hunc mundum, ergo injustus esse non potest. So, substantially, Grotius, Tholuck, De Wette, Rckert, Kllner, Meyer, Hodge. It seems that the Apostle here assumes the very thing he is to prove. But he reasons from acknowledged premises: God is universally conceived as the Judge of all mankind; this necessarily implies that He is Just. The opposite is inconsistent with the idea of God as Judge, and with the nature of the judgment.P. S.]
[30][So also the Vulgate (prcellinius), Luther, Calvin, Beza, E. V., Grotius, Bengel, Tholuck, Rckert (2d ed.), Reiche, Philippi, Baur, Bloomfield, Alford, Wordsworth, Hodge, who says, with De Wette, that this is the only interpretation which suits here.P. S.]
[31][Sometimes, however, the middle and the active form of the same verb are used without a perceptible difference; as in Luk 15:6, ; Rom 3:9, (according to Lachmann; while Tischendorf reads the active); Jam 4:2 f., and ; Act 16:16, ; Act 19:24, , prstabat. Comp. Winer, Gramm., p. 240 f., 7th ed. There is, it is true, no example of the active use of . But the middle voice may have been preferred here to the active, because the Apostle speaks of a superiority which the Jews claimed for themselves for their benefit; comp. , Tit 2:7. This, then, comes to the interpretation of Lange, sub No. 4. The reading of Cod. Boerner: , gives the same sense.P. S.]
[32][The Greek classics use instead; Meyer.P. S.]
[33][Meyer: 1. Sinful condition (Rom 3:10-12); 2. sinful manifestations, in word (13, 14), and in deed (1517); 3. the source of sin (18).P. S.]
[34][, according to the accentuation of Lachmann; or , as Alford accentuates. It is the usual form in the Septuagint for (comp. Rom 3:11; Mat 13:23, var.), and is derived from the obsolete root for . See Winer, p. 77 ( 14, 3). It answers to the Hebrew , a word often used to express the right understanding of religious truth.P. S.]
[35][Stronger than the simple verb; comp. 1Pe 1:10; very frequent in the LXX.; Meyer.P. S.]
[36][An Alexandrian and Hellenistic form for ; see Sturz, Dial. Alex., p. 61, and Winer, p. 74, where similar examples are quoted: as for , , for , , , , &c.P. S.]
[37][On this important verse, Dr. Hodge (pp. 125133) is very full and clear; while Alford and Wordsworth pass it over very slightly.P. S.]
[38][Several Roman Catholic and Rationalistic commentators meet from opposite extremes on Pelagian ground, and resolve the meaning of this passage simply into this: that men are not justified by any external rites or ceremonial works, such as circumcision and sacrifices, but only by moral acts of the heart and will. But the prevailing Romish doctrine is, that works of the law are works done before regeneration, which have only the merit of congruity; while the works done after regeneration, and therefore under the impulse of Divine grace, have the merit of condignity, and are the ground of acceptance with God.P. S.]
[39][De spiritu et litera ad Marcellinum, cap. Romans 8 : Nec audiunt quod legunt: quia non justificabitur ex lege omnis caro coram Deo (Rom 3:20). Potest enim fieri coram hominibus, non autem coram illo qui cordis ipsius et intim voluntatis inspector est. ? Ac ne quisquam putaret hic apostolum ex lege dixisse neminem justificari, qu in sacramentis veteribus multa continet figurata prcepta, unde etiam ipsa est circumcisio carnis ? continuo subjunxit quam legem dixerit, et ait: Per legem enim cognitio peccati (Rom 3:20). Augustine agrees with the Reformers in the doctrine of total depravity and salvation by free grace without works, but agrees with the Roman Catholic view of the meaning of justification, as being a continuous process essentially identical with sanctification.P. S.]
[40][Meyer says this in view of the principle: (Rom 2:13), but he immediately adds that no human being can fully comply with the law: that the law only makes us more conscious of our moral imperfections.P. S.]
[41][If should be the true reading, against which, see, however, Lachmann and Tischendorf.P. S.]
[42][Pseudo-Barnabas says, l. c.: Thou (addressing the Jew) wilt say, Yea, verily the people are circumcised for a seal. But so also is every Syrian and Arab, and all the priests of idols: are these, then, also within the bond of this covenant (or, according to the reading of Cod. Sin.: their covenant)? Yea, the Egyptians also practise circumcision.P. S.]
[43][Tholuck means the old Lutheran conception of circumcision, and refers to Gerhard (Loc. Theol., vol. ix., pp. 12, 30), who teaches that circumcision was a sacrament of grace, in which the verbale elementum of Divine promise was connected with the material element.P. S.]
[44][The old Protestant divines speak of a threefold use of the law: 1. Usus politicus, or civilis (in the state, which can only be governed by laws); 2. usus elenchticus, or pdagogicus (leading to a knowledge of sin and misery); 3. usus didacticus, or normativus (regulating the life of the believer). Comp. the Formula Concordi p. 594 sq. Similar to this is the German sentence, that the law is Zgel, Spiegel, and Riegel, a restraint, a mirror, and a rule.P. S.]
[45][Comp. Archbishop Tillotson, Sermon on 2Ti 2:19 (quoted by James Ford on Romans): Baptism verily profiteth, if we obey the gospel; but if we walk contrary to the precepts of it, our baptism is no baptism, and our Christianity is heathenism. We would say: worse than no baptism, worse than heathenism. For in proportion to the blessing intended, is the curse incurred by abuse. The case of an apostate Christian is far more hopeless than the case of an unconverted heathen. The one has Christianity behind him, the other before him; the one has deliberately cast it off, the other may thankfully embrace it.P. S.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
DISCOURSE: 1828
CHRISTIANS ADVANTAGES ABOVE HEATHENS
Rom 3:1-2. What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way.
IT is not easy to form a just estimate of the privileges attached to the profession of Christianity: we are ready either, on the one hand, to rate them too high, or, on the other, to undervalue and despise them. The Jews laid so great a stress on their relation to Abraham, that they could scarcely conceive it possible for them to perish: they concluded, that because they bore in their flesh the external seal of Gods covenant, they must of necessity be partakers of its spiritual blessings: and when St. Paul shewed them their error, they indignantly replied, What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Thus many amongst ourselves are apt to imagine, that their having been admitted by baptism into the Christian covenant will secure them an admission into heaven: and, when they are warned against this sad delusion, they are ready to say, that the heathen are in a happier state than they. In opposition to this, we propose to shew,
I.
What advantages we, as Christians, have above the heathen
The Apostle intimates, that the Jews, merely as Jews, possessed every way much advantage above the heathen: but, instead of descending to particulars, he contents himself with specifying one, which, as it was the greatest, so in fact it included all the rest, namely, that to them were committed the Oracles of God. What he has stated thus comprehensively, we shall enter into more minutely.
We say then, that as Christians, we have many things to which the heathen are utter stangers: we have,
1.
A guide for our faith
[The oracles which the heathen consulted, were altogether unworthy of credit. Their answers were purposely given with such ambiguity, that they might appear to correspond with the event, whatever the event might be [Note: A famous instance of this is mentioned by Herodotus, B. i.Cyropdia, B. vii. Crsus, king of Lydia, inquired of his gods, Whether he should make war against Cyrus? The Oracles answered, That he was then only to think himself in danger, when a mule should reign over the Medes; and that, on his passing over the river Halys, he should destroy a powerful kingdom. Relying on these answers as predicting success, he commenced the war, which speedily terminated in the ruin of himself and his whole kingdom: and when he complained that he had been deceived by the Oracles, he was told, That Cyrus was that mule (being a Persian by his fathers side, and a Mede by his mothers); and that the kingdom which he was to destroy, was his own. See the account given in Prideauxs Connection of the Old and New Testament History.]. But our oracles have no such subterfuges: nor can we possibly err in giving to them the most implicit confidence. They declare to us the nature and perfections of Godthe way which he has appointed for our reconciliation with himthe eternal state of those who shall embrace his proffered mercy, and of those who shall reject it. Of these things the heathen were wholly ignorant; nor could their oracles afford them any instruction on which they could rely.
What an amazing advantage then has the meanest Christian above the greatest of the heathen philosophers! The little volume which he has in his hand, sets before him innumerable truths, which reason never could explore; it reveals them to him so plainly, that he who runs may read and understand them: and, instead of deceiving him to his ruin, it will make him wise unto everlasting salvation.]
2.
A warrant for his hope
[The oracles which could declare nothing with certainty, could afford to their votaries no solid ground of hope. But the Christian who believes the oracles of God, has an anchor for his soul so sure and steadfast, that not all the storms or tempests which either men or devils can raise, shall ever drive him from the station where he is moored. Suppose his discouragements to be as great as the most gloomy imagination can paint them; he has reasons in plenty to assign for his hope. The sovereignty of Godthe sufficiency of Christthe freeness and extent of the promisesthe immutability of Jehovah, who has confirmed his promises with an oaththese, and many other things which are revealed in the sacred volume, may enable the person who relies upon them to go to the very throne of God himself, and to plead for acceptance with him: and, in proportion as he relies upon them, he has within his own bosom a pledge, that he shall never be ashamed.
What an advantage is this to the man that is hoping for eternal happiness! Surely blessed are the eyes which see the things that we see, and hear the things which we hear.]
3.
A rule for his conduct
[The wise men of antiquity could not so much as devise what constituted the chief good of man; much less could they invent rules which should be universally applicable for the direction of their followers: and the rules which they did prescribe, were in many respects subversive both of individual and public happiness. But the oracles of God are proper to direct us in every particular. We may indeed in some more intricate cases err in the application of them, (else we should be infallible; which is not the lot of man upon earth;) but in all important points the path we are to follow is made as clear to us as the racers course: yea, the word is not only a general light to our feet, but a lantern to our steps: so that what was obscure at a distance, is discovered to us on our nearer approach, and a direction is given us, This is the way; walk ye in it. The whole circle of moral and religious duty is thus accurately drawn. The poor man who is conversant with his Bible, needs not to go to the philosopher, and consult with him; nor need he regard the maxims current in the world. With the Scriptures as his guide, and the Holy Spirit as his instructor, he needs no casuist, but an upright heart; no director, but a mind bent upon doing the will of God. If he derive assistance from any, it is from those only who are more fraught with divine knowledge, and whose superior illumination has qualified them to instruct others. But they are no farther to be regarded, than as they speak according to the written word.
Compare now the illiterate Christian with the most learned pagan, and see how greatly he is benefited in this respect also by the light of revelation. If indeed he rest in his admission into the Christian covenant, and look no further than to a mere profession of Christianity, he may easily overrate his privileges: but if he consider them means to an end, and improve them in that view, he can never be sufficiently thankful, that he was early received into the bosom of the Church, and initiated by baptism into a profession of Christs religion.]
Having stated our advantages, we proceed to notice,
II.
The improvement we should make of them
If the possession of the sacred oracles constitute our chief advantage, doubtless we should,
1.
Study them
[Search the Scriptures, says our Lord, for in them ye think ye have eternal life. If we neglect the word of God, we lose the very advantage which God in his mercy has vouchsafed to give us, and reduce ourselves, as much as lieth in us, to the state of heathens. If then we shudder at the thought of reverting to heathenism, let us, not on some occasions only, like the heathen, but on all occasions, consult the oracles, whereby we profess to be directed. Let our meditation be in them day and night; and let them be our delight and our counsellors [Note: See Deu 6:6-9 and Psa 1:2 and Pro 2:1-6.] ]
2.
Conform ourselves to them
[The end of studying the sacred oracles is not to obtain a speculative knowledge, but to have our whole souls cast, as it were, into the mould which is formed therein. By them we must regulate both our principles and our practice. We must not presume to dispute against them, because they are not agreeable to our pre-conceived opinions; we must not complain that this is too humiliating, and that is too strict; but must receive with submission all which the Scriptures reveal, believing implicitly whatever they declare, and executing unreservedly whatever they enjoin If we do not thus obey the truth, we shall indeed be in a worse state than the heathens; our baptism will be no baptism; and the unbaptized pagans, who walk according to the light they have, will rise up in judgment against us for abusing the privileges which they perhaps would have improved with joy and gratitude [Note: Rom 2:25-27.].]
3.
Promote the knowledge of them in the world
[If God had imparted to us a secret whereby we could heal all manner of diseases; and our own interest, as well as that of others, would he greatly promoted by disclosing it to the whole world; should we not gladly made it known? Shall we then withhold from the Gentile world the advantages we enjoy; more especially when God has commanded us to communicate as freely as we have received? Should we not contribute, by pecuniary aid, or by our prayers at least, to send the Gospel to the heathen, that they may be partakers with us in all the blessings of salvation?
But there are, alas! heathens, baptized heathens, at home also; and to those we should labour to make known the Gospel of Christ. We should bring them under the sound of the Gospelwe should disperse among them books suited to their states and capacitieswe should provide instruction for the rising generationwe should especially teach our own children and servantsand labour, by turning men from darkness unto light, to turn them also from the power of Satan unto God.]
Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)
CONTENTS
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit of circumcision? (2) Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. (3) For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? (4) God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. having therefore started the question in the first verse, opens at once in the , to give answer. And he begins with setting forth, the vast advantage the had over the notwithstanding the mercies themselves had, by their abuse of them, been much perverted. And while he observes, that their privileges were every way great, he mentions one, which indeed, more or less, comprehended in its bosom every other; namely, in having the Oracles of his holy Word, which so blessedly set forth, in type and shadow, as well as by absolute promise and prophecy, the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The Apostle is here further prosecuting the Subject respecting the Jews. He proves the full Condemnation of all the World before God by the Deeds of the Law, In the close, he sweetly preacheth Christ.
Rom 3:1-4 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit of circumcision? (2) Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. (3) For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? (4) God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? (2) Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. (3) For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? (4) God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
We cannot sufficiently admire, the very delightful method, the Apostle was led to adopt, in this Chapter, while prosecuting his subject. He puts a question into the mouth of the Church, which he foresaw would arise in the minds of the people, from what he had said, and as instantly answers it. Concluding, that from the leveling principle he had made, of hewing down at one stroke both Jew and Gentile, as alike unable to justify themselves before God, it would stagger the faith of many, who had before conceived, as the Jews all along had done, high notions of their privileges; he demands, to what good the whole of the dispensation by the Jew had tended? What advantage then (saith he) hath the Jew; or what profit is there of Circumcision? As if he had said, If your statement be correct, that the Jew is as far from salvation by the law, as the Gentile is by nature; to what purpose was it to be born of the natural stock of Abraham, or what use was it for all his children to be circumcised?
The answer to those interesting questions, which the Apostle immediately follows up, in a most ample and satisfactory manner, gives occasion to set forth, in yet stronger features of character, the object he had all along in view, of the utterly lost and helpless estate of every man before God, in anything of his own. And the great drift from the whole is, to prove the absolute need of Christ; and the compleatness in Christ, in a way of a full, free, and finished justification.
Paul having therefore started the question in the first verse, opens at once in the , to give answer. And he begins with setting forth, the vast advantage the had over the notwithstanding the mercies themselves had, by their abuse of them, been much perverted. And while he observes, that their privileges were every way great, he mentions one, which indeed, more or less, comprehended in its bosom every other; namely, in having the Oracles of his holy Word, which so blessedly set forth, in type and shadow, as well as by absolute promise and prophecy, the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.
having therefore started the question in the first verse, opens at once in the second, to give answer. And he begins with setting forth, the vast advantage the Jew had over the Gentile, notwithstanding the mercies themselves had, by their abuse of them, been much perverted. And while he observes, that their privileges were every way great, he mentions one, which indeed, more or less, comprehended in its bosom every other; namely, in having the Oracles of his holy Word, which so blessedly set forth, in type and shadow, as well as by absolute promise and prophecy, the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.
I beg the Reader to pause in this place. And, I would ask him, whether it doth not strike him, that over and above these things, among the many blessed designs in God the Holy Ghost, when committing the sacred Oracles to the Jewish nation, which contain such abundant proofs and testimonies, of all the leading doctrines of our most holy faith; that this also was a very principal one: namely, to confirm to all the after ages of the Church, the truth as it is in Jesus. Who, that reads the Scriptures of the Old Testament with an enlightened eye, but must see the doctrine of the Holy Three in One, which bear record in Heaven, shining with full lustre in every Book? Who that hears the Prophets, predicting the coming of the Messiah, but must be struck with their witness to the Godhead of Christ? All, with one voice, bearing testimony to one and the same fundamental truth; behold your God will come and save you! then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped!, Isa 35:4-5 ; Luk 4:16-21 . And who that reads so much of the out-pouring of the Spirit in the latter day dispensation, upon all flesh; can hesitate to conclude, but that the leading design for which such grace was foretold, was that the minds of the people in the Church of God, might be led to discover, under his Almighty teaching, sweet features of the Person, Godhead, and Ministry, of the Eternal Spirit?, Joe 2:28 , with Act 2:17 ; 1Co 12 throughout.
The Reader may, if he please, accept the foregoing paragraph as if written within a parenthesis. I could not suppress the thought, which involuntarily arose in my mind, from the view, of the sacred Oracles having been all along deposited with Israel, for this among other purposes. And, I hope it may be found useful. With such as call in question those fundamental truths of our holy faith, I cannot suppose it will be interesting. But the Poor Man’s Commentary is designed for a very different class, Jas 2:5 . And, all of a contrary complexion, are invulnerable to conviction, untaught by the Spirit; neither can they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead!, Luk 16:31 .
The Apostle very properly argues, that the unbelief of Israel, could not do away God’s promises, which were not conditional, for those promises depended not upon the merit of man, but the faithfulness of God. And the instance of David is as gracious as it is striking, by way of confirmation. God’s promise to David, was an absolute unconditional promise, that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne, Psa 132:11 ; Act 2:30 . But shall David’s sin, in the case of Bathsheba, do away this promise? God forbid. Yea, let God be true, and every man a liar. The Lord must be justified in his sayings. His word must stand. And, if presumptuous men will dare to impeach, either the Lord’s word, or his wisdom, in any of his dispensations; he will be found justified and holy in all. Reader! do not overlook by the way the blessedness of this doctrine, as it may be, and as it ought to be, applied, to numberless occasions in life.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Rom 3:1-3
‘The Jews,’ says Heine, ‘might well console themselves for the loss of Jerusalem and the Temple, and the Ark of the Covenant, the sacred jewels of the high priest, and the golden vases of Solomon. Such a loss is trifling compared with the Bible that indestructible treasure which they saved.’
References. III. 1. H. S. Holland, Vital Values, p. 211. III. 1-8. Bishop Gore, The Epistle to the Romans, p. 114. III. 19. Expositor (5th Series), vol. vi. p. 66. III. 2. Ibid. (4th Series), vol. iii. p. 13. III. 3. W. P. Du Bose, The Gospel According to St. Paul, p. 57. H. Alford, Sermons on Christian Doctrine, p. 42. P. McAdam Muir, Modern Substitutes for Christianity, p. 3. III. 3, 4. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxviii. No. 2255. III. 5. Expositor (5th Series), vol. ix. p. 11. III. 9. Ibid. (6th Series), vol. x. pp. 188, 193. III. 9-20. Bishop Gore, The Epistle to the Romans, p. 121. III. 10-12. Expositor (5th Series), vol. iii. p. 280. III. 10-18. Ibid. (4th Series), vol. vii. p. 421. III. 10, 19-24. W. P. Du Bose, The Gospel According to St. Paul, p. 69. III. 11. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xliii. No. 2545. III. 12. Expositor (6th Series), vol. vii. p. 114; ibid. vol. xi. p. 287. III. 13-18. H. Bushnell, Preacher’s Magazine, vol. xix. p. 365. III. 14. Expositor (6th Series), vol. xii. p. 62.
The Consciousness of Evil
Rom 3:20
Here the Apostle speaks of the fundamental evil, sin, and of its emergence in our consciousness. Let us notice: I. The instrument of conviction. ‘By the law.’ Do you ask for a summary of this law? You have it in the ten commandments of Sinai. Do you ask for an exposition of it? Revelation at large is its paraphrase. Do you ask for an example of it? You have the supreme example in Jesus Christ. The law of which our text speaks is the law of inward truth, love, justice, purity, peace, and this is the instrument whose fierce light convinces the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment. Keats says, ‘Axioms are not axioms until they have been proved upon our pulses.’ No; only then does the profound meaning of the simple trite maxim come out. And the axioms of the moral law are not axioms to us, we do not appreciate their infinite depth and significance, until the Spirit of God has proved them upon our wounded conscience and our troubled heart.
II. The consciousness of sin. (1) By the law as unfolded in revelation we discover the fact of sin. Renan has written, ‘It may be said, in fact, that original sin was an invention of the Jahvaist’. What a strange misuse of language to speak of the sacred writers as inventing original sin! No; revelation did not invent the doctrine of original sin; that doctrine serious men have discerned in all ages, that doctrine the scientist finds deep down in the grounds of human nature. What revelation has done is to define the doctrine, to make clear its real nature, to express its characters, to discover its source, to bring it home to the conscience, and, thank God, to prescribe for it a sovereign remedy. (2) By the law as unfolded in revelation we discover the nature of sin. Sin, as against God, is the preference of our own will to the Supreme Will. Sin, as against society, is the exaggeration of our own personal rights to the prejudice of our neighbour. Sin, as against ourselves, is the preference of our lower to our higher nature. (3) By the law as unfolded in revelation we discover the strength of sin. (4) By the law as unfolded in revelation we discover the guilt of sin.
III. A word to those who have no proper consciousness of sin. To have no consciousness of sin, no proper consciousness of it, is no proof of our integrity; much more likely is it a proof that our conscience has become benumbed and indurated by years of worldliness and disobedience. (1) We must come to the light that we may be reproved. (2) We must remember that the law does not give us deliverance from sin. (3) The redemption of our life is in Christ Jesus.
W. L. Watkinson, The Transfigured Sackcloth, p. 149.
References. III. 20. W. B. Selbie, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lv. p. 44. Expositor (4th Series), vol. iv. p. 22; ibid. vol. viii. p. 22; ibid. (5th Series), vol. viii. p. 277; ibid. (6th Series), vol. iii. p. 175; ibid. (7th Series), vol. v. p. 338. III. 21. Ibid. (4th Series), vol. ix. p. 342; ibid. (5th Series), vol. vii. p. 148. III. 21, 22. Bishop Bethell, Sermons, vol. i. pp. 1 and 20. Expositor (5th Series), vol. iv. p. 131; ibid. vol. viii. p. 143. III. 21-30. Ibid. p. 62. III. 21.-IV. 25. Bishop Gore, The Epistle to the Romans, p. 130. III. 22, 23. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlv. No. 2608. III. 22-25. W. P. Du Bose, The Gospel According to St. Paul, p. 83.
Rom 3:23
So we come to the word which is in some sense the governing word of the Epistle to the Romans the word all. As the word righteousness is the governing word of St. Paul’s entire mind and life, so the word all may stand for the governing word of this his chief Epistle.
Matthew Arnold.
References. III. 23. H. Alford, Sermons on Christian Doctrine, p. 1. J. N. Bennie, The Eternal Life, p. 50. J. T. Parr, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lvi. p. 4. T. F. Crosse, Sermons (2nd Series), p. 27. J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons (9th Series), p. 160. R. J. Campbell, City Temple Sermons, p. 13. F. W. Farrar, Truths to Live By, p. 217. III. 23-26. Bishop Gore, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlvii. p. 241. Expositor (4th Series), vol. ii. p. 257; ibid. (6th Series), vol. viii. p. 335. III. 24. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. iii. No. 126. E. A. Stuart, The Great High Priest and other Sermons, vol. xii. p. 25. Expositor (4th Series), vol. vi. p. 135; ibid. (6th Series), vol. iii. p. 331. III. 24, 25. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. vii. No. 373. F. W. Farrar, Truths to Live By, p. 260. III. 24-26. C. D. Bell, The Power of God, p. 24. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. liii. No. 3038. Expositor (4th Series), vol. v. pp. 112, 358, 432.
Rom 3:25
The happy period which was to shake off my fetters, and afford me a clear opening of the free mercy of God in Christ Jesus was now arrived. I flung myself into a chair near the window, and seeing a Bible there, ventured once more to apply to it for comfort and instruction. The first verse I saw was the 25th of the 3rd of Romans: Whom God set forth to be a propitiation, through faith, by His blood, to manifest His righteousness. Immediately I received strength to believe, and the full beams of the Sun of Righteousness shone upon me. In a moment I believed, and received the gospel.
Cowper.
References. III. 25. A. Moorhouse, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lvii. p. 264. F. W. Farrar, Truths to Live By, p. 247. Expositor (4th Series), vol. viii. p. 193; ibid. (5th Series), vol. x. pp. 103, 328. III. 25, 26. J. D. Thompson, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xlviii. p. 42. Expositor (4th Series), vol. vi. p. 347; ibid. (5th Series), vol. iv. p. 277; ibid. vol. vi. p. 158. III. 25-28, 31. W. P. Du Bose, The Gospel According to St. Paul, p. 97.
Rom 3:26
Justification… is a great and august deed in the sight of heaven and hell; it is not done in a corner but by Him who would show the world what should be done unto those whom the king delighteth to honour. It is a pronouncing righteous while it proceeds to make righteous.
Such is the force of passages like the following: To show forth His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, to show forth, I say, at this time, His righteousness. Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? Who is he that condemneth? as if publicly challenging the world… and so again St. Paul, quoting Isaiah, Whosoever believeth in Him shall not be ashamed. In these and similar passages the great recovery or justification of the sinner in God’s sight is not the silent bestowal of a gift, but an open display of His power and love.
Newman’s Lectures on Justification.
References. III. 26. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. v. No. 255. W. Robertson Nicoll, Ten Minute Sermons, p. 201. Expositor (5th Series), vol. vii. p. 375. III. 27. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. viii. No. 429. Expositor (4th Series), vol. viii. p. 83. III. 27-30. J. Denney, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lvii. p. 292. III. 27-31. Ibid. vol. lix. p. 233. III. 28. John Thomas, Myrtle Street Pulpit, vol. ii. p. 114. W. J. H. Price, Preacher’s Magazine, vol. x. p. 36. J. T. O’Brien, The Nature and the Effects of Faith, pp. 77, 103, 127. III. 31. F. B. Woodward, Sermons (2nd Series), p. 320. IV. For an Exposition of the whole chapter see Bishop Gore’s The Epistle to the Romans, p. 155. Expositor (4th Series), vol. vii. p. 423.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
The Law of Faith
Rom 3
What advantage then hath the Jew? ( Rom 3:1 ). Somebody must have an advantage. All men cannot begin at the same point. What is the advantage which God has allotted to some? Is it a vital difference, or is it only an initial privilege, carrying with it a great responsibility, and meant to be shared by all the world? Is God a partisan, a darling-maker? Has he made some men to be saved, and others to be damned? The Apostle undertakes to discuss these great questions, and to discuss them in a way which has been in too many instances absolutely misunderstood. It is amazing to find how often the Apostle has been taken in the exactly contrary sense to that which he meant to establish. There is nothing narrow about Paul; he has no heaven filled with little darlings, pet saints favoured ones, on whom God for some inscrutable reason has set peculiar marks of favour. The Apostle says God is no respecter of persons. The Apostle is not indiscriminating; he knows that the Jews had advantages, and great advantages; but he acknowledges these, and then proceeds to show that the Jews were as bad as anybody else. The Apostle is very erratic in all this epistolary discussion: he cannot keep to the point two moments. The genius of his mind is revealed in this epistle characteristically. He will not follow out any one line of thought; the Apostle’s was a fervent, erratic, ardent, and often uncontrollable genius. The Apostle Paul had not time to finish sentences; he scarcely began one sentence before he saw the opening of another, and he plunged after it by no recognised law of movement. In this very chapter he says “in the first place,” but he never says “in the second place”; he forgets that he had proposed to himself an arithmetical enumeration. The book is the better for this. It is not mechanical; it is not a piece of art in clay: this is a mind on fire, a mind let loose amid the radiant mysteries of God; and now the mind is here, and now there, and before anything is rounded into spherical, completeness and harmony, the mind bounds off again in some other direction; so that chapter iii. is completed in chapter ix.: and yet who would not rather have this Paul-like rush and tumult of thinking, with its million points of suggestiveness, than some smooth and easily forgotten insignificance? Those who have a partisan heaven have no vindication of it in the Epistle to the Romans, and yet it is on that epistle they have built their little pantheon. If they do meet Paul face to face one of the parties will be ashamed. If ever there was an epistle written by the human hand that was meant to commend the universality of the Divine love and the universality of the Cross of Christ, it is the Epistle to the Romans. And yet some men have leased this epistle for a given period of years, and have let out heaven in small parcels to people on whom they have fixed their indiscriminating and worthless affection.
“What advantage then hath the Jew?… Much every way: chiefly [literally, in the first place] because that unto them were committed the oracles of God,” not oracles in the Pagan sense of dim, mysterious, ambiguous utterances of which nothing could be made, but the utterances of God, the flashing words, the life-giving syllables, the treasury of wisdom. Somebody must have these in the first place. The mountains have great advantages over the valleys, because they catch the first sunlight, but they grow nothing: the plough has not wrought its mystery of tillage on Alpine heights; it would be out of place there, and the snow-peaks would resent the intrusion. Yet it is on them that the dawn first alights; the valleys have to wait. Somebody must begin first. It is so with liberty: why not with grace? All nations do not enjoy an equal extent of freedom. The nations that do enjoy the freedom are not put in possession of it as a selfish franchise and inheritance and family estate. Every nation that is inspired with the spirit of philanthropy as well as with the spirit of patriotism holds its liberty for the world; opens its door widely that every runaway who has brought with him a good character may find hospitality and security. The time was when men could say, the moment the slave touches British soil his trammels drop from him and he stands up a man. This freedom is held in trust. Our liberties are not to make us self-conceited but to liberalise us, and make us feel that we have a gospel for all who are in bonds. It is a great responsibility to have the first laws, the first light, the first liberty, the first inkling of the right relation of things. That advantage brings with it its responsibilities. No man can rightly hold a liberty and keep it to himself. In the apostolic times they had all things common, and we must have them all common now; not in the little detailed pedantic sense, but in the greater meaning of the words. He who has liberty has it for all men; he who has knowledge is but a trustee of his knowledge, that he may deal it out to those who are in ignorance and long to be instructed; he who is strong holds his strength for the weak. Whenever you see a nation beaten down by a strong arm you have a right to interfere; whenever you see a child cruelly ill-treated by a ruffian, that child becomes yours by the right of its helplessness. Parenthood is created by great necessities. No strong man is at liberty to take his strength away unused and unimpaired when he has seen the weak smitten and the helpless oppressed. The Jews were treasurers, the Jews were librarians; the Jews had the oracles, or utterances of God, not to keep, but to publish. They did not understand them, but their not understanding the scope of their mission in the world does not reflect on the benevolence and the love of the all-saving Father. Possibly, the Apostle thinks, you may object to this reasoning because some Jews are unbelieving “for what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?” The doctrine of the Apostle is that the unbelief of some does not destroy the value of the faith of others. He is not laying down here a maxim which requires a trained sagacity to penetrate and understand. The Apostle here writes the alphabet of things. We do in commerce precisely what the Apostle is doing in what may be termed theology. Because there is one fraudulent person in the city, is the city thereof wholly given over to dishonesty? On the contrary; the dishonesty of the few may be a foil throwing up into keener expressiveness the righteousness and honourableness of the many. Because there is falsehood in some, is there truthfulness in none? Because some are selfish, are all wanting in benevolence? There is a public health which, as we have seen, is perfectly consistent with countless instances of personal disease. There is a national honesty, so that a nation as a nation shall have a great reputation among the nations of the earth for honesty, although within that nation itself there may be many who are through and through eaten up with the disease of dishonesty. So there may be a faithfulness where there is much faithlessness; there may be a real Christianity though there are many professing Christians who are but actors before God, and whose clumsy action is laughed at by mocking angels. It is so with the Church. There is a real Church of Christ upon the earth, though many who are in it have no right to serve at its altar and to proclaim its name. So the Apostle says, “What if some did not believe?” Undoubtedly there were unbelieving Jews, rebellious hearts, wills that went away from God in self-seeking, and hungered after darkness and evil, as if they could banquet upon the midnight and revel in the wilderness: shall we, says the Apostle by inference, reject the idea that God is building a nation, because some individual units which he wished to handle are refractory, recalcitrant, impracticable?
“What then? are we [Jews] better than they [Gentiles]?” Everything depends upon Paul’s answer to that inquiry. He puts the question, he must give the answer. What is the question? “Are we Jews better than they Gentiles?” “No, in no wise.” Yet this is the man who is supposed to favour a partisan heaven, and to put into heaven whom he pleases; this is the man who is supposed to set one nation on the right hand and another nation on the left hand, without reason, without sound argument, or without condescending to consult the spirit of honesty. Paul has charges against his friends; Paul has been “slanderously reported” of by many theologians. He wanted if possible to enlarge heaven, to make room for Africa and the islands of the sea, and the benighted places of the earth; nor would he rest until he had told every living soul that God wanted that soul at home. The Apostle does not treat his fellow Jews daintily; he pays them no special compliments; he does not say, Gentlemen Jews, you are all right, you have no care or thought about this matter; you are sure of heaven whatever comes of these aliens and wanderers, these outcasts and desperadoes. Paul rather says, “We have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin.” So that the advantage was not one of nature; the Jews were not made of better clay; the advantage did not refer to vital partialities: the Jews had the book first, but it was meant to be read, believed, and honoured by the Gentile. In a sense, therefore, the Jew is the servant of the Gentile; he had a priority of responsibility, but not the exclusiveness of privilege. Paul writes an indictment of the human race in Rom 3:10-18 :
“As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known: there is no fear of God before their eyes.” ( Rom 3:10-18 )
That is his impeachment. The charge is not made against Jews as Jews, nor is it made against Gentiles as Gentiles; it is made against Jews and Gentiles as men. How energetic he could be! “There is none righteous, no, not one.” What of that white-robed priest that stands there as if an incarnation of righteousness? He is as bad, originally, natively, as the man who has not yet begun to pray. “There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.” Nor is the charge metaphysical, remote, dealing with certain subjectivities that lie beyond common knowledge and general apprehension. The men are not sinners only, they are criminals; “their throat is an open sepulchre,” a yawning chasm, opening its jaws in the hunger of hell; “with their tongues they have used deceit:” rather, “with their tongues they are using deceit”: the action is immediate and continued; there is no escape from the grammar in the verb which the Apostle used. We may throw our accusations into the perfect and the pluperfect, anyway to get rid of them, by depositing them in some grammatical hole, but the Apostle’s verb is a verb of continuance: they are using, now using, always using, deceit; they are a lie. “The poison of asps” the poison bag is under the particular tooth with which they bite most severely. This was Paul’s conception of human nature. No wonder he wanted a real Gospel. Some of us prefer Paul’s account of human nature to any other. I should be glad to contradict the Apostle if I could do so honestly, but I am bound when his accusation has ceased to roll its thunders to say, There is one man at least of whom that is a full-length portrait. Modify the letters as you may, twist the account into new shape as you may be able ingeniously to do, you cannot alter the heart of it; the whole accusation is in one sentence “there is no fear of God before their eyes”; and lost reverence is lost character; a lost standard of righteousness, living and eternal, is a lost manhood.
The Apostle now proceeds to say a good deal about law. Perhaps we have been misled as to the meaning of his reasoning by this little word “the”; strike out that word, and the whole argument is made broader and stronger. “Now we know that what things soever the law saith” read, “Now we know that what things soever law saith.” “Therefore by the deeds of law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by law is the knowledge of sin.” The Apostle is not referring to anything that is written and is to be found within four corners, he is referring to a certain epoch in the evolution of human nature and human thought; he is referring to the particular time when men began to shape their conduct by statute and precept and code of behaviour, as that they should rise at this hour, and work so long, and within the given hours should do so many deeds, and that such deeds should be rewarded, and such other deeds should be punished: that is law: a mechanical contrivance, an arrangement of discipline, an economy by which men try to train themselves. The thought was a noble one; and it loses nothing of its nobility from the fact that it is not complete in itself. Here is human nature beginning to see that disorder will not do; tumult, incohesiveness, mutual repulsion will no longer satisfy the growing instinct and the growing intelligence of man: there must be something constructive, architectural; some things must be elevated into honour, and other things hitherto permitted must be trampled under foot as base: here we open the page that begins the development of law, order, cosmos, the shaping and regulation of things. The Apostle does not condemn this, but looking upon it he says, you will find this utterly insufficient when you come to vital matters: the law can have no reference to yesterday; law can only begin when itself is made known; the law we did not know yesterday we cannot be judged by: “By law is the knowledge of sin.” Law catalogues human actions, enumerates them, indicates their quality, points out all their issue and meaning; without the law there is no sin; sin is the transgression of law; now, continues this mighty reasoner, if you want your souls made right you will have to drop all your little codes of discipline, all your pedantic arrangements, and mechanical contrivances, and rise from law to faith, a mystery, a miracle, not to be explained in words, but to be felt after the soul has taken that infinite leap.
Thus the Apostle’s argument is cumulative and historical. He begins at the beginning; he knows that the Jews have certain advantages of a temporal kind, he then proceeds to outline human nature as it appears to the eyes of God; then he puts the great question, How to escape from this nature into the new nature? And in that action he lays down the rule or doctrine that all further progress, all upward movement is to be inspired by, directed by, and crowned by, the action or Ministry of Faith. He will not allow the Jew to come in by one way and the Gentile to come in by another way; he does not say to the Jew, You shall come up the front avenue, you shall drive to the portals of your father’s house in chariots drawn by steeds of fire, wearing harness of gold; and you Gentiles must come in at midnight by some unfrequented path, that will be pointed out to you by some condescending person. He says, “There is no difference; for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” How is it to be then? To be? By ransom, by sacrifice, by propitiation, “through faith in his blood.” Are there those who would have it explained? They must be denied. Are there those who think of blood, in some narrow, common, vulgar, debasing sense? Then they do not take God’s view of the meaning of the term blood: this is not a murder, it is a sacrifice; this is not a measurable quantity of hot fluid rushing from the fountains of life, this is an offering never to be explained in cold words, yet to be felt when the heart is most tender, penitent, broken, self-helpless; when the heart is in that receptive mood it will know the meaning of the words, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” Where is boasting then? Gone! Who can find it? None. By what law is it excluded? The law of works? No, but by the law of faith, the new law, diviner, higher, larger law. You thought law was a matter of conduct and discipline, and you based certain measurable economies upon law; now you must grow into the further truth that the true law is faith, and faith is the true law. “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid.” Where that word “God forbid” occurs substitute the word “impossible,” a thing necessarily excluded from the whole line of thought and action. “Yea, we establish the law:” it is because we have come into a higher law through the medium of the lower law, and that lower law has often been a necessary medium, lying on the way to the higher law, the broader and grander law. We do not work now against our strength, as if spending ourselves in fruitless labour; we are not Sisyphus-like, rolling up a stone which comes back faster than we can roll it; on the contrary, having now the spirit of faith, the inspiration of faith, we come back upon all the moralities, and do them easily, musically, lovingly; we establish the law, because we live under the ministry of a higher inspiration. If any man wants to get rid of law he cannot be a Christian: if any man says, Now I can come from the Cross of Christ to do the law more easily and lovingly and obediently, then we know that he has tasted the bitterness of death with Christ, and has tasted with him the joy of resurrection.
Thus Paul is an Evangelist of the world. He will have all men to be saved. “Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also.” Is that a man likely to partition heaven off into so many tents and arbours for the accommodation of certain inhabitants of Europe to the exclusion of the whole population of Africa? Is that a man who was likely to say to the Gentiles, Nothing can be done for you; the whole universe was constructed for the Jews, and to the Jews it must be given. Hear him: “Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also.” Yet this is the man whose name is often quoted as sanctioning the blasphemy that God has predestined some men to be lost.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
XII
THE UNIVERSAL NECESSITY OF SALVATION (CONCLUDED)
Rom 2:17-4:25
I revert to Rom 2:6-9 , referring to judgment: “Who will render to every man according to his works: to them that by patience in well-doing seek glory and honor and incorruption, eternal life: but unto them that are factious, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that worketh evil.” That discussion of the judgment is the judgment of law without gospel consideration. Otherwise it contradicts the whole plan of salvation set forth in the letter, for it makes patient continuance in well-doing the basis of salvation.
Another point in Rom 2 is that under the law, being a Jew outwardly could not save a man. The real Jew is one inwardly and has circumcision of the heart. He must be regenerated, and the publication of the grace plan all along ran side by side with that law plan, even in the Old Testament.
God never had but one plan of salvation from the beginning.
That leads to this question, If, being naturally a Jew and circumcised according to the Jewish law, and keeping externally the ritual law did not save him, as Rom 3 opens what advantage then hath the Jew? The answer to that is that to the Jews were committed the oracles of God, and they had a better chance of getting acquainted with the true plan of salvation. Then what if some of these Jews were without faith? That does not destroy that advantage; they had the privilege and some availed themselves of it. Does that not make the grace of God of none effect? In other words, if God is glorified by the condemnation of unbelievers, how then shall the man be held responsible? His answer is, “God forbid,” for if that were true how could God judge the world? That supposition destroys the character of God in his judgment capacity. If God were the author of sin and constrained men by an extraneous power to sin, he could not be a judge. All who hold the Calvinistic interpretation of grace must give fair weight to that statement. Whenever God does judge a man, his judgment will be absolutely fair.
Once when a party of preachers were discussing election and predestination I asked the question, “Do you believe in election and predestination?” The answer was, “Yes.” “Are you ever hindered by what you believe about election in preaching a universal gospel? If you have any embarrassment there it shows that you have in some way a wrong view of the doctrine of election and predestination.” A young preacher of my county went to the wall on that thing. It made him practically quit preaching, because he said that he had no gospel except for the sheep. I showed him how, in emphasizing one truth according to his construction of that truth, he was emphatically denying another truth of God. That brings up another question: If the loss of the sinner accrues to the glory of God, why should he be judged as a sinner? A supposition is made. Under that view would it not be well to say, “Let us do evil that good may come?” There were some slanderous reports that such was Paul’s teaching. He utterly disavows such teaching or that any fair construction of what he preached tended that way.
We come now to his conclusion of the necessity of the gospel plan of salvation. He bases it upon the fact that under the law of nature, providence, and conscience, under the law of Sinai, under any form of law, the whole world is guilty. There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none that understandeth. There is none that seeketh after God; They have all turned aside, they are together become unprofitable.
So apart from the gospel plan of salvation there is universal condemnation.
We come to his next conclusion (Rom 3:13-18 ) that man’s depravity is total. Total refers to all the parts, and not to degrees. He enumerates the parts to show the totality. That doesn’t mean that every man is as wicked in degree as he can be, but that every part is so depraved that without the gospel plan of salvation he cannot be saved: Their throat is an open sepulchre; With their tongues they have used deceit; The poison of asps is under their lips; Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; Their feet are swift to shed blood; Destruction and misery are in their ways; And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes.
With mankind universally guilty, and every member totally depraved, we get another conclusion that whatever things the law says, it says to those under the law. No matter whether the law of conscience, the law of nature, or the moral law of Moses, those under the law must be judged by the law. That being so, he sums up his conclusion thus: “By the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight.”
That brings us to consider the gospel plan of salvation (Rom 3:21-8:39 ) and covers six points justification, redemption, adoption, regeneration, sanctification, and glorification. For the present we will discuss that part called justification. He commences by stating that while there is no righteousness by the law, there is a righteousness apart from the law, and this way of salvation apart from the law is witnessed by the law itself and by the prophets, and that this righteousness is presented to both Jew and Gentile without any distinction, and that always has been the way from the beginning of the world to the present time. If God has seemed to discriminate in favor of the Jews, he looked toward the Gentiles through the Jews, and if he now seems partial to the Gentiles against the Jews, he is looking toward the restoration of the Jews. This righteousness is presented to all men on the same terms faith and this righteousness presented by faith is of grace. Man doesn’t merit it, either Jew or Gentile it is free.
It is the hardest thing in the world to convince a sinner that salvation comes from no merit of his, and that faith is simply the hand that receives. Throughout all the length of the great chain of salvation it is presented without discrimination of race, color, sex, or previous condition of servitude. We come now to the ground of it. That ground is redemption through Christ. To redeem means to buy back. It implies that the one was sold and lost. It must be a buying back, and it would not be of grace if we did the buying back. It is a redemption through Jesus Christ. He is the Redeemer the one who buys back. The meritorious ground consists in his expiation reaching us through his mediation. He stands between the sinner and God and touches both. The first part of his mediation is the payment of that purchase price. He could not, in paying the purchase price, stand for God unless God set him forth as a propitiation. He could not touch man unless he himself, in one sense, was a man, and voluntarily took the position. The effectiveness of the propitiation depends upon the faith of the one to receive Jesus. That covers all past sins. When we accept Jesus we are acquitted forever, never again coming into condemnation. I said that that “covers past sins.” We must understand this. Christ’s death avails meritoriously once for all for all the sins of a man, past, present, and future. But in the methods of grace there is a difference in application between sins before justification and sins after justification. The ground is one, before and after. But the Holy Spirit applies differently. When we accept Jesus by faith as he is offered in the gospel, we at once and forever enter into justification, redemption of soul, and adoption into God’s family, and are regenerated. We are no longer aliens and enemies, but children and friends of God. God’s grace therefore deals with us as children. Our sins thereafter are the sins of children. We reach forgiveness of them through the intercessions of our High Priest and the pleadings of our Advocate. (See Heb 9:25-26 ; Heb 7:25 ; 1Jn 2:1 .) We may be conscious of complete peace when justified (Rom 5:1 ), but our consciences condemn us for sins after justification, and peace comes for these offenses through confession, through faith, through intercession, through the application of the same cleansing blood by the Holy Spirit. So in us regeneration is once for all) but this good work commenced in us is continued through sanctification with its continual application of the merits of Christ’s death. Therefore our theme says, “From faith to faith.” Not only justified by faith, but living by faith after justification through every step of sanctification. We don’t introduce any new meritorious ground. That is sufficient for all, but it is applied differently. Justification takes place in heaven. It is God that justifies. The ground of the justification is the expiation of Christ. The means by which we receive the justification is the Holy Spirit’s part of regeneration which is called cleansing. Regeneration consists of two elements, at least cleansing and renewing. But the very moment that one believes in Christ the Holy Spirit applies the blood of Christ to his heart and he is cleansed from the defilement of sin. At the same time the Holy Spirit does another thing. He renews the mind. He changes that carnal mind which is enmity toward God. Few preachers ever explain thoroughly that passage in Ezekiel: “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you and you shall be clean. I will take away your stony heart and give you a heart of flesh.” There is the cleansing and the renewing. Jesus says, “Born of water and Spirit.” There are no articles in the Greek. It is one birth. In Titus we find the same idea: He saved us “by the washing of regeneration,” the first idea’ and “the renewing of the Holy Spirit,” the second idea.
This method of justification enables God to remain just in justifying a guilty man. If we could not find a plan by which God’s justice would remain, then we could find no plan of justification. How do we understand that to be done upon this principle of substitution? J. M. Pendleton in his discussion of this subject based upon a passage in the letter to .Philemon, explains it. Paul says, “If thou hast aught against Onesimus, put it on my account.” Now Philemon can be just in the remission of the debt of Onesimus, because he has provided for the payment of that debt through Paul; so Christ promised to come and pay our debt and the payment is reckoned to the man that accepts Christ, thus showing how remission of sins in the case of Old Testament saints precedes the actual payment, or expiation, by Christ. God charged Abraham’s debts to Christ, and Christ promised to pay them when he should come into the world. Abraham was acquitted right then. So far as God was concerned, the debt was not expiated until Christ actually came and died. In our case, expiation precedes the faith in it. He expiated my sins on the cross before I was born. There came a time when the plan of salvation by that expiation was presented to me, and I received it, and then remission took place.
This plan of salvation by faith not only justifies God, but absolutely excludes any boasting upon the part of the man. If the man had paid the debt himself he could claim to be the cause of this justification. But since he did not contribute one iota to the payment of the debt, there is no possible ground for him to boast. This plan brings out God’s impartial relation both to Jew and Gentile, since both are admitted upon equal terms.
We come to an objection that has been raised. If God acquits the man without his having paid the penalty of the law, does not that make the law void? His answer is an emphatic denial. It not only does not make the law void, but it establishes the law. How? The law is honored in that the Substitute obeys it and dies in suffering its penalties. Further by the fact that this plan takes this man saved by grace and gives him, through regeneration, a mind to obey the law, though it may be done imperfectly, and then through sanctification enables him to obey the law perfectly. It fulfils all of its penal sanctions through the one who redeems and through the Holy Spirit’s work in the one that is redeemed. When I get to heaven I will be a perfect keeper of the law in mind and in act. We can easily see the distinction between a mere pardon of human courts, which is really contrary to law, and a pardon which magnifies and makes the law honorable. It was on this line that I once preached a sermon on the relation of faith to morals, showing that the only way on earth to practice morality is through the gospel of Christ. So we see that God can be just and the justifier of the ungodly.
Salvation that comes up to the point of justification will, ”through the same plan, be continued on to the judgment day. In his argument to prove that God’s plan of salvation has always been the same) Paul illustrates it by the two most striking Old Testament cases that would appeal to the Jewish mind, one of which is the case of Abraham’s conversion which is recorded in Gen 15 . Up to that time Abraham was not a saved man, though he was a called man and had some general belief in God. At that time he was justified, and he was justified by faith, and righteousness was imputed to him; it was not his own. That was before he was circumcised, and it deprived him of all merit, and made him the father of all who could come after him in the spiritual line. He proves this by the promise to Abraham and his seed, and shows that that seed refers, not to his carnal descendants, but to the spiritual descendant, Jesus Christ. Then he goes on to show that as Isaac, through whom the descent flowed, was born, not in a natural manner, but after a supernatural manner, so we are born after a supernatural manner. He then takes up the further idea that that was the only way in the world to make the promises sure to all the seed.
Take the thief on the cross. He had no time to get down and reform his life. He was a dying sinner, and some plan of salvation must be devised which would be as quick as lightning in its operation. Suppose a man is on a plank in the deep and about to be washed away into the watery depths. He cannot go back and correct the evils that he has done and justify himself by restitution. If salvation is to be sure to him, it must work in a minute. That is a great characteristic of it. David was their favorite king. His songs constituted their ritual in the Temple of worship. He testifies precisely the same thing: “Blessed is the man whose sin is covered,” that is, through propitiation. Blessed is the man to whom God imputeth no transgression. He takes these two witnesses and establishes his case. He shows that the results of justification are present peace, joy, and glory, thus commencing, “Being therefore justified by faith, let us have peace with God.”
QUESTIONS
1. What Judgment is referred to in Rom 2:6 , and what the proof?
2. Who was the real Jew?
3. What advantage had the Jew?
4. Did all Jews avail themselves of this advantage?
5. Does that not make the grace of God of none effect, and why?
6. Does the doctrine of election hinder the preaching of a universal gospel, and why?
7. If the loss of the sinner accrues to the glory of God, why should he be judged as a sinner?
8. What is Paul’s conclusion as to the necessity of the gospel plan of salvation, and upon what does he base it?
9. What Paul’s conclusion as to man’s depravity, what is the meaning of total depravity, and how is it set forth in this passage?
10. What his conclusion as to the law?
11. What then his summary of the whole matter?
12. What is the theme of Rom 3:21-8:39 , and what six phases of the subject are thus treated?
13. Is there a righteousness by the law, what the relation of the law to righteousness, and to whom is this righteousness offered?
14. How do you explain God’s partiality toward the Jews first and then toward the Gentiles?
15. What are the terms of this righteousness, and what its source?
16. What is this phase of salvation called, and what is the ground of it?
17. What is redemption, and what does it imply?
18. What is the meritorious ground of our justification, and upon what does the effectiveness of it depend?
19. What is the difference in the application to sins before justification and to sins after justification?
20. What is justification, where does it take place, what accompanies it in the sinner, how, what its elements and how illustrated in both the Old and the New Testaments?
21. How does this method of justification by faith enable God to remain just and at the same time justify a guilty man?
22. What is J. M. Pendleton’s illustration of this principle?
23. What bearing hag this on the case of Old Testament saints?
24. How does this plan of salvation exclude boasting?
25. What objection is raised to this method of justification, and what the answer to it?
26. How is the law honored in this method of justification?
27. What is the distinction between a mere pardon of human courts and this method of pardon?
28. How does Paul prove that the plan of salvation has always been the same?
29. How does Paul show that that was the only way to make the promises sure to all the seed?
30. What is the testimony of David on this point, and what its special force in this case?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
Ver. 1. What advantage ] Gr. , what odds, singular thing, prerogative?
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1 20. ] TAKING INTO ALL FAIR ACCOUNT THE REAL ADVANTAGES OF THE JEWS, THESE CANNOT, BY THE TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE ITSELF CONCERNING THEM, EXEMPT THEM FROM THIS SENTENCE OF GUILTINESS BEFORE GOD, IN WHICH ALL FLESH ARE INVOLVED.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1 4. ] The circumcised Jew did unquestionably possess great advantages, which were not annulled by the rebellion of some .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1. ] , ‘qu cum ita sint.’ If true Judaism and true circumcision be merely spiritual, what is the profit of external Judaism and ceremonial circumcision?
] advantage, profit, pre-eminence , see reff. It is best to take the question, not as coming from an objector , which supposition has obscured several parts of this Epistle, but as asked by the Apostle himself , anticipating the thoughts of his reader.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 1:18 to Rom 11:36 . ] THE DOCTRINAL EXPOSITION OF THE ABOVE TRUTH: THAT THE GOSPEL IS THE POWER OF GOD UNTO SALVATION TO EVERY ONE THAT BELIEVETH. And herein, ch. Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20 , inasmuch as this power of God consists in the revelation of God’s righteousness in man by faith, and in order to faith the first requisite is the recognition of man’s unworthiness, and incapability to work a righteousness for himself, the Apostle begins by proving that all, Gentiles and Jews, are GUILTY before God, as holding back the truth in unrighteousness. And FIRST, ch. Rom 1:18-32 , OF THE GENTILES.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 3:1-8 . It might easily seem, at this point, as if the Apostle’s argument had proved too much. He has shown that the mere possession of the law does not exempt the Jew from judgment, but that God requires its fulfilment; he has shown that circumcision in the flesh, seal though it be of the covenant and pledge of its promises, is only of value if it represent inward heart circumcision; he has, it may be argued, reduced the Jew to a position of entire equality with the Gentile. But the consciousness of the Jewish race must protest against such a conclusion. “Salvation is of the Jews” is a word of Christ Himself, and the Apostle is obliged to meet this instinctive protest of the ancient people of God. The whole of the difficulties it raises are more elaborately considered in chaps. 9 11; here it is only discussed so far as to make plain that it does not invalidate the arguments of chap. 2, nor bar the development of the Apostle’s theology. The advantage of the Jew is admitted; it is admitted that his unbelief may even act as a foil to God’s faithfulness, setting it in more glorious relief; but it is insisted, that if God’s character as righteous judge of the world is to be maintained as it must be these admissions do not exempt the Jew from that liability to judgment which has just been demonstrated. The details of the interpretation, especially in Rom 3:7 f., are somewhat perplexed.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Rom 3:1 f. is that which the Jew has “over and above” the Gentile. ; = “What good does his circumcision do him?” goes with . : however you choose to view the position. suggests that such an enumeration of Jewish prerogatives might have been made here as is given at length in Rom 9:4 f. In point of fact, Paul mentions one only, in which the whole force of the Jewish objection to the arguments of chap. 2 is contained, and after disposing of it feels that he has settled the question, and passes on. The first, most weighty, and most far-reaching advantage of the Jews, is that “they were entrusted with the oracles of God”. They were made in His grace the depositaries and guardians of revelation. must be regarded as the contents of revelation, having God as their author, and at the time when Paul wrote, identical with the O.T. Scriptures. In the LXX the word occurs mainly as the equivalent of , which in various passages ( e.g. , Psa 119:38 ) has the sense of “promise”; in ordinary Greek it means “oracle,” the Divine word given at a shrine, and usually referring to the future; hence it would be natural in using it to think of the prophetic rather than the statutory element in the O.T., and this is what is required here. The O.T. as a whole, and as a revelation of God, has a forward look; it anticipates completion and excites hope; and it is not too much to say that this is suggested by describing it as . The sum of it was that God had promised to His people “a future and a hope” (Jer 29:11 : see margin, R.V.), and this promise seemed threatened by the argument of the last chapter.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Romans Chapter 3
The apostle’s statement at the end of Rom 2 had laid down with irresistible force for the conscience that God will have reality rather than form. Let the Jew then beware. This gives occasion to objections which are met in the earlier part of Rom 3:1-8 .
“What therefore [is] the superiority of the Jew, or what the profit of circumcision?” To this or at least the former of these questions the apostle replies, “Much in every way; for, first, because they were entrusted with the oracles of God.” In its proper place he enumerates the various high distinctions of Israel; but here he singles out, as foremost, that which had been their constant, and most precious privilege, the possession of God’s written word; and the rather too as this was most suited to demonstrate their moral delinquency. For what use had they made of it? Where was the fruit of so great a favour?
Here again there is an anticipation of any argument founded, however unreasonably, on Jewish refractoriness which knew that the glory of God can never fail. “For what if some believed not? shall their unbelief make void the faith of God? Let it not be, but let God be true and every man false, even as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy words, and overcome when thou art judged.” God holds fast infallibly to His truth, and men fail in faithfulness because of want of faith, which is insensible to sin, trusts self and has no confidence in God. That there is any, the smallest, failure on God’s part he indignantly repudiates, and insists that He at least be vindicated to man’s shame and confession of his own evil; even as David found his only resource in acknowledging his sin to God, clearing Him at all cost to himself. Indeed this is the secret of blessing for the sinner; and the willingness to own his ruined estate God operates in the heart by the revelation of His own grace. Our sins justify His words.
Of this the objector would again take advantage by contending that God could not then consistently punish us. Hence the apostle cuts off such misuse of the truth by what follows. “But if our unrighteousness commend God’s righteousness, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who inflicteth wrath? I speak according to man. Let it not be: since how shall God judge the world?” This last was an axiom with the Jew, who was willing enough to allow justice in dealing with the earth at large (as, e.g., Abraham had entrenched himself on it in favour of exempting Lot from the destruction then impending over the cities of the plain). Impossible that there can be unrighteousness in God. But this very consideration was fatal to the fond delusion of self-security to which an unrighteous Jew yielded. God brings Himself glory even in face of man’s iniquity; but iniquity is none the less, nor the less surely to be judged of God for all that. Hence he allows the objection to betray its own heinousness and leaves it when thus self-exposed without an answer, as necessarily condemned even by the most ordinary natural conscience. “For if the truth of God abounded in my lie to his glory, why any longer am I too judged as a sinner? and not, even as we are slanderously reported, and even as some give out that we say, ‘Let us do evil that good may come?’ – whose judgment is just.” Such reasoning resembled what was falsely put into the mouth of the Christian, and proved too truly of the Jewish adversary that, in seeking to escape the conviction of his own hopeless exposure to God’s judgment, he was obliged, as with the stiffest legalist is so often the case, to slip into principles of very gross antinomianism. It must always be thus, where men, cloaking their sins, hope for mercy from God; and the more inconsistently, as they ignore His grace and confess that He is the judge of all.
Next, from verse 9 the general argument is resumed, all the stronger for the interruption which rebuked the vain struggles and detailed cavils of the Jew. “What therefore? are we better? Not at all; for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles to be all under sin, even as it is written, There is none righteous, not one; there is not the [man] that understandeth; there is not the [nation] that seeketh God. All went out of the way, thus then they became unprofitable; there is none that doeth kindness, there is not so much as one. Their throat [is] an open grave; with their tongues they used deceit; venom of asps [is] under their lips; whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; swift [are] their feet to shed blood; ruin and misery [are] in their ways, and no way of peace they knew. There is no fear of God before their eyes. Now we know that whatever things the law saith, it speaketh to those that are in the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world come under judgment with God; because by works of law no flesh shall be justified before him, for by law is knowledge of sin.” (Ver. 9-20.) The Jew then is no better. The Gentiles were utterly degraded and guilty, as we saw in Rom 1 ; the Jews had brought shame on the Lord in proportion to their exceeding privileges. To clench this last point the apostle cites from the Psalms and prophets, especially Psa 53 and Isa 59 . Righteousness, intelligence, and even desire after God were not to be found, but all gone aside, and useless morally. Nay, every whit of them was corrupt or violent, – throats tongues, lips, feet, eyes. And this, as is remarked: was God’s estimate, not of men merely but of the Jew, and addresses itself to those under itself as no Jew would deny.
The overwhelming conclusion, then, is that every mouth is closed and the whole world comes in guilty before God. The Jew never doubted the wickedness of the idolatrous Greeks, Romans, or other Gentiles. This to him was patent and unquestionable. But the flattering and most mistaken inference of immunity he drew from his own position, as having God’s law and ordinances. No, reasons the apostle, this demonstrates your guilt to be even greater than the heathens, if you are no less immoral than they; and that such is the fact certainly flows from the revealed sentence of the law on the people who have that law.
Thus all stand inexcusable in their guilt before God; and this, because law-works cannot justify – still less of course the works that man’s mind suggests, or that the will of others may extort. If any works could justify anybody, those of God’s law must be the surest benefit to the Jew. But the truth is that no flesh shall be justified from any such source in His sight; for contrariwise law never produces holiness but is only the means of arriving at a full knowledge of sin.
There is another point I would notice as to the two chief portions which the apostle quotes from the Old Testament. The psalm and the prophecy already referred to terminate respectively – the former, with an earnest wish that the turning-point for Israel were come out of Zion, their captivity giving place to the long-looked-for joy and deliverance – the latter, with the declaration that the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and the covenant of blessing be theirs for ever. That is, both texts in their original connection close their sad account of Israel’s sin with the yearning after, and the distinct prediction of, the kingdom of God restored to Israel with all accompanying blessedness and glory. But in the New Testament they are followed by the indiscriminate grace of God to every sinner that believes in Christ. In the former it is redemption by power; in the latter it is redemption by blood, which is come in meanwhile, before the Redeemer appears in power and glory, as He will soon.
Hitherto it has been for the most part negative statement or argument. The proof is complete that the Jew has righteousness for God no more than the Gentile, whom no Jew could doubt to be hopelessly ruined in sin, as indeed the state of the heathen, before the gospel testimony went forth, was to the last degree deplorable. But it had been shown from their own Psalms and Prophets that Israel was wholly evil in the sight of God; and to demonstrate this the Apostle needs nothing but the admitted postulate that, whatever things the law says, it speaks to those that are under the law; i.e., the Jews. Thus, both being demonstrated to be mere sinners (the Jews who had most pretension by the most sweeping and express testimonies of their own boasted divine oracles), every mouth was stopped, and all the world obnoxious to God’s judgment. Law made its possessors no better, could not justify, but only give full knowledge of sin – sorrowful result for the sinner!
Then, what law could not do, God does by His good news. “But now without law God’s righteousness is manifested, being testified by the law and the prophets, even God’s righteousness through faith of Jesus Christ unto all, and upon all that believe.” What fulness of truth, and what a compressed and precise expression of it! Man’s righteousness was nowhere among the Gentiles. It had been asked for by the law among the Jews; but the law received no answer save of guilt. Those among them whose conscience was upright acknowledged that all their righteousnesses were as filthy rags, and that their iniquities, like the wind, had taken them away – that for their sins and for the iniquities of their fathers, the Jews had become a reproach to all that were about them. In the very writings which confessed their ruin the prophets spoke of Jehovah bringing near His righteousness. “My righteousness is near; my salvation is gone forth.” “My salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.” “My righteousness shall be for ever, and my salvation from generation to generation.” “My salvation is near to come, and my righteousness to be revealed.” (Isaiah 46, 56; Dan 9:16 , Dan 9:24 .) So, in the types of the law, the entire sacrificial system sets forth a righteousness of God outside man, yet most truly for him, which meets its only adequate significance in the mighty work and death of Jesus. But the law and the prophets were only witnesses, testifying that this divine righteousness was not come, but coming; the shadows of a substance not yet present, the prediction of what was to be, and then near to come. Now it is come and manifested. It is quite independent of law, on the wholly different principle of grace, though the law as well as the prophets bore an anticipative witness to it. Law (not in its types, but in its proper character) appeals to the individual’s own obedience, knows nothing of a substitute. Grace always supposes the intervention of God Himself in His Son, who in the cross establishes the right of God to bless him that believes in Jesus. It is not simply His prerogative of mercy; it is His righteousness. For the blood of the only acceptable victim is shed, the sacrifice is offered, the judgment of the sins has fallen on Him, He has accepted it all. This then is the new sort of righteousness; not man’s, which, if it existed, must be according to the law; not the sinner’s, of course (for he, being a sinner, has none which can avail), but God’s, according to the types of the law and the declarations of the prophets, now no longer hidden or even promised, but manifested. He who believes God’s testimony in the gospel to Jesus Christ His Son, confesses his sins and trusts God, not himself; he sees and owns what God can righteously do for him through the cross, and thus shares in His righteousness.
The manuscripts differ as to the text here. Some of the most ancient (the Sinai, Vatican, Alexandrian, and Rescript of Paris, beside some juniors, versions, and fathers) omit (“and upon all”). But I agree with the judgment of those who retain the received text in this, and I have little doubt that the words were omitted through the eye or ear resting on one so as to overlook the other. Possibly indeed one scribe or more may have designedly left out the clause, fancying it to be a mistake from not apprehending the scope, and conceiving, like some commentators (e. g., Dean Alford), that there is no real difference of meaning in the prepositions. But this is incorrect. There is no difference of words in scripture without a different sense, though sometimes the shade is so fine as to be more easily felt than expressed. Here the distinct force of the clause is plain and important. The former ( ) marks the direction of God’s righteousness. It is not, like the law, restricted to a single nation; it addresses itself “unto all” men without exception; but the benefit depends on faith in Jesus Christ, and hence it only reaches and takes effect “upon all that believe.” This distinction is of great practical value; but it turns mainly on the difference of the prepositions. Divine righteousness was in principle applicable to all, but in fact applied only to all believers.
It was no question of right in man, but in God, and this through Christ’s redemption. “For there is no difference; for all sinned, and do come short of the glory of God.” When man was innocent, he simply enjoyed the creature gifts around in thankfulness to Him who had set him in the midst of all and over all which God had pronounced “very good.” But when he sinned, God appeared and could have no test to try him by short of His glory, which drives out sinful man from before His face. Hence the necessity for divine grace if he is to be justified. This accordingly is the immediate topic of discourse: “being justified [i.e. all who are being justified] gratuitously by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiatory through faith in his blood, for a declaration of his righteousness on account of the praeter-mission of the sins that had been before in the forbearance of God, with a view to the declaration of his righteousness in the present time, in order to his being just and justifying him that is of faith in Jesus.”
Thus the utter sin of man makes it an absolute necessity that, if he is to be justified at all, he must be justified gratuitously by God’s grace. The question of desert or previous fitness is excluded. This suits the grace and majesty of God quite as much as the abject need of man. His grace moreover does no dishonour to His holy and righteous character, but the very reverse; and all through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. What is the ransom He purposed and has found? Christ a propitiatory through faith in His blood whom He set forth for a declaration of His righteousness. For God passed over the sins of believers in Old Testament times, looking forward to Christ’s blood to vindicate Him, and forbearing all the while. But now it is not a matter of forbearance. The debt is cancelled, the blood is shed, His righteousness is no longer in prospect, but brought in and manifested, and God is proved to be just in justifying him that believes in Jesus. (Ver. 26.)
This therefore exalts God and His Son, but leaves no room for the boasting of those who trust in themselves that they are righteous. “Where then [is] boasting? It was excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by [the] law of faith. For we reckon that a man is justified by faith without works of law. Is he the God of Jews only? [Is he] not also of Gentiles? Yea of Gentiles also; since God is one who shall justify [the] circumcision by faith and uncircumcision through their faith? Do we then make void law through faith? Far be it: but we establish law.” (Ver. 27-31.) The principle of faith shuts the door against glorying in one’s own works, because it means justification by faith apart from works of law. But the moment it is allowed that this is God’s sanctioned way, He is certainly not God of Jews more than of Gentiles, but is one and the same to both, who will justify circumcised persons not by law as they expect, but by faith, and if uncircumcised have faith, through it He will justify them also.
Is this destruction of law as a principle? The very opposite. Law never had such a sanction as in the gospel proposed to faith, whether one looks at the sinner totally condemned under it or at Christ made a curse on the cross. On the other hand, those who would treat Christians as under the law for their rule do enfeeble its authority, because these are taught to hope for salvation at the same time that they fail to meet its requirements. This is not to establish law, but to make it void.
Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Rom 3:1-8
1Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God. 3What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it? 4May it never be! Rather, let God be found true, though every man be found a liar, as it is written, “That You may be justified in Your words, And prevail when You are judged.” 5But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? The God who inflicts wrath is not unrighteous, is He? (I am speaking in human terms.) 6May it never be! For otherwise, how will God judge the world? 7But if through my lie the truth of God abounded to His glory, why am I also still being judged as a sinner? 8And why not say (as we are slanderously reported and as some claim that we say), “Let us do evil that good may come”? Their condemnation is just.
Rom 3:1 “what advantage has the Jew” Paul is continuing to use the literary technique of diatribe, or a supposed objector, to communicate his message. For a listing of the privileges of the Jewish people, see Rom 3:2; Rom 9:4-5. Paul develops this paragraph in Romans 9-11.
Rom 3:2 “First of all” Paul uses “first” in Rom 1:8, but without a second item being mentioned. He does the same here. Paul’s writing was so intense, as well as being dictated, that often his grammatical constructions are incomplete.
“they were entrusted with the oracles of God” Having God’s revelation is an awesome responsibility as well as a tremendous privilege (cf. Rom 9:4-5). They were stewards of God’s gift (aorist passive, cf. 1Th 2:4).
The word logion (oracles) is used in the Septuagint for the word from God (cf. Num 24:4; Num 24:16; Deu 33:9; Psa 107:11; Psa 119:67; Isa 5:24; Isa 28:13), which would denote the OT. It is consistently used in this same sense in the NT (cf. Act 7:38; Heb 5:12; 1Pe 4:11).
Rom 3:3 “if” This is a first class conditional sentence which is assumed to be true from the author’s perspective or for his literary purposes. Rom 3:5; Rom 3:7 are also first class conditional sentences.
The grammar of Rom 3:3 expects a “no” answer.
NASB, NKJV”some did not believe”
NRSV, NJB”some were unfaithful”
TEV”what if some of them were unfaithful”
This may refer either to individual Israelite’s (1) unfaithfulness or (2) lack of personal faith in YHWH. It is difficult to relate intellectually to the unconditional promises of God (i.e., redemption of a fallen mankind) and the conditional mandate of human response. See SPECIAL TOPIC: COVENANT at Rom 9:4. Yet this is a biblical paradox (cf. Rom 3:4-5). God is faithful even when His people are not (cf. Hosea 1, 3; II T im. Rom 2:13).
“nullify” See Special Topic below.
SPECIAL TOPIC: NULL AND VOID (KATARGE)
“the faithfulness of God” This truth (cf. 1Co 1:9; 1Co 10:13; 2Co 1:18) is foundational to humans’ trust in God’s (cf. Deu 7:9; Isa 49:7).
1. unchanging character
2. eternal promises
He has revealed Himself in creation, revelation, covenant, and Messiah! Even amidst human unfaithfulness He remains faithful (cf. 2Ti 2:13)!
Rom 3:4
NASB”May it never be!”
NKJV, TEV”Certainly not!”
NRSV”By no means!”
NJB”That would be absurd.”
This is a rare use of the optative mood which expressed a wish or a prayer and this phrase should be translated, “May it never be.” It may reflect a Hebrew idiom. This phrase of “astonished unbelief” was often used by Paul because of his literary technique of diatribe (cf. Rom 3:4; Rom 3:6; Rom 3:31; Rom 6:2; Rom 6:15; Rom 7:7; Rom 7:13; Rom 9:14; Rom 11:1; 1Co 6:15; Gal 2:17; Gal 3:21; Gal 6:14). It was his way of emphatically denying a supposed assertion.
Notice the literary ways Paul rejects the supposed objector questions and statements.
1. “May it never be,” Rom 3:4; Rom 3:6
2. “Let God be found true, though every man be found a liar,” Rom 3:4
3. “(I am speaking in human terms),” Rom 3:5
4. “(as we are slanderously reported and as some claim that we say),” Rom 3:8
“let God be found true, though every man be found a liar” This is a present middle imperative. This construction focuses on the continuing state of the subject; God is faithful and truthful (see Special Topic at Rom 1:18), humans are unfaithful and liars! This is an allusion to Psa 116:11 and is similar to what Job had to learn in Job 32:2; Job 40:8.
Notice the universal element of sinfulness in this chapter, represented by Paul’s use of pas (all, every) in Rom 3:4; Rom 3:9; Rom 3:12; Rom 3:19-20; Rom 3:23-24, but praise God, also the universal offer of salvation to all (cf. Rom 3:22).
“as it is written” Literally “it has been and continues to be written.” This is a perfect passive indicative. It became a technical idiom used to assert God’s inspiration of the Scriptures (cf. Mat 5:17-19). It introduces a quote from Psa 51:4 from the Septuagint (LXX).
Rom 3:5-6 The argument Paul is making in these verses relates to God’s special choice of Israel as His means of reaching the world (cf. Gen 12:3; Exo 19:5-6). In the OT “election” referred to service, not special privilege. God made a covenant with them. He was faithful; they were unfaithful (cf. Nehemiah 9). The fact that God judged unfaithful Israelites is evidence of His righteousness.
Israel was meant to be a means of reaching the Gentiles. They failed (cf. Rom 3:24)! God’s purpose of universal salvation (cf. Gen 3:15) is not affected by the failure of Israel. As a matter of fact, God’s faithfulness to His original covenant is confirmed in Romans 9-11. Unbelieving Israel is rejected, but a believing Israel will culminate God’s plan of redemption.
Paul’s diatribe in Rom 3:5-6 is paralleled in Rom 3:7-8.
Rom 3:5 “if” This is a first class conditional sentence which is assumed to be true from the author’s perspective or for his literary purposes. Rom 3:3; Rom 3:7 are also first class conditional sentences.
“If our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God” This pronoun, “our,” must refer in a collective sense to all Jews. See special topic at Rom 1:17
“what shall we say” Paul is still using diatribe (cf. Rom 3:5; Rom 7:7; Rom 8:31; Rom 9:14). Paul is clarifying his presentation by the use of a supposed objector (cf. Mal 1:2; Mal 1:6-7; Mal 1:12-13; Mal 2:14; Mal 2:17 [twice]; Rom 3:7; Rom 3:13-14).
NASB”(I am speaking in human terms)”
NKJV”(I speak as a man)”
NRSV”(I speak in a human way)”
TEV”(I speak here as men do)”
NJB”- to use a human analogy -“
Paul often used human logic in his theological arguments (cf. Rom 6:19; 1Co 9:8; Gal 3:15). Here it functions as a way of rejecting the assertions of the supposed objector.
Rom 3:7-8 There is an obvious parallel between Rom 3:5; Rom 3:7 (both begin with ei de). Paul is either
1. continuing to use the literary technique of diatribe, a supposed objector (cf. Rom 3:5; Rom 3:7; Rom 7:7; Rom 8:31; Rom 9:14; Rom 9:30)
2. reacting to criticism of his justification-by-faith-alone preaching (cf. Rom 3:8)
Paul did not explain or answer the charge in detail but forcefully condemns the accusation. It is possible that the objection to a free undeserved justification by faith was that it would lead to lawlessness or just more unfaithful disobedience. Paul believed that free grace would lead to Christlikeness through a new spirit and life of gratitude! The Jews, the Greek moralists, and Paul all wanted ethical living in their converts! But it comes, not through conformity to an external law code, but a new heart, a new mind, and a new spirit (cf. Jer 31:31-34; Eze 36:22-36).
Rom 3:7 “if” This is a first class conditional sentence (also Rom 3:3; Rom 3:5) which is assumed to be true from the author’s perspective or for his literary purposes.
“abounded” See Special Topic at Rom 15:13.
“His glory” See note at Rom 3:23
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
What, &c. = What then is the advantage of the Jew, or what is the, &c.
profit. Greek. opheleia. Only here and Jud 1:16.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
1-20.] TAKING INTO ALL FAIR ACCOUNT THE REAL ADVANTAGES OF THE JEWS, THESE CANNOT, BY THE TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE ITSELF CONCERNING THEM, EXEMPT THEM FROM THIS SENTENCE OF GUILTINESS BEFORE GOD, IN WHICH ALL FLESH ARE INVOLVED.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Shall we turn in our Bibles now to Rom 3:1-31 .
Paul has just told the Jews that having the law does not justify a person. It is the keeping of the law that justifies one. That uncircumcision really has no value in just the ritual itself. Circumcision has no value; it is the circumcision of the heart, spiritual circumcision that God really counts.
Therefore, if a person is really walking after the Spirit, though he may not have had the physical rite of circumcision, still God counts what is in his heart. If circumcision doesn’t really do anything for me, if having the law doesn’t do anything for me as far as giving me a righteous standing before God, then the question would naturally arise, and Paul brings it up in chapter 3, verse Rom 3:1 .
What advantage then doth the Jew have? ( Rom 3:1 )
Being a Jew, what advantage is it? If circumcision doesn’t make me righteous, if the law doesn’t make me righteous, then what advantage is there in being a Jew? Paul said,
Much and in every way ( Rom 3:2 ):
Though Paul said, “Much and in every way,” he only gives us one advantage here in the text. This one advantage that Paul names, firstly, or the most important advantage. The word first is there used as often in the New Testament to express the first or most important way. That a Jew has an advantage is unto them were committed the oracles of God. For the Word of God was committed unto them. Now that is a tremendous advantage, the advantage of having the Word of God, and never underestimate the value and the advantage of having the Word of God.
God committed unto them His word, and in so doing, they kept the Word of God with great care and with great accuracy, thus, we owe a tremendous debt to them for the way they have preserved so carefully the Word of God and brought it to us as God gave it to them, as pure from error as is any human document or as any human document could be.
When a person was hired as a scribe to copy the scriptures, this, of course, was considered a great honor. It was a sacred trust. They held the Word of God very sacred, and rather than copying the text by words or by sentences, they would copy letter by letter and one would copy, and the other one would check his copy.
In the copying of the scriptures they would not allow any erasers, any strike overs, or any changes. If a mistake was made they had to begin all over again. Now that is not talking about a page, that is talking about a scroll. The entire book of Isaiah was written on a scroll. And if on the end, on the last chapter of Isaiah, if on the last words they made a mistake, they would rip up the scroll and months of labor tossed out for they would not allow for any mistakes at all.
That is why when the Dead Sea scrolls were discovered it was such an exciting thing to Bible scholars, because among the scrolls that were found in the Qumran cave was the scroll of Isaiah, which was 600 years older than any complete copy of Isaiah we have. There was an intense interest in comparing those copies of Isaiah with the Dead Sea scroll, because now you are making a leap of 600 years earlier, closer to the time of Isaiah.
Of course, the fascinating thing was that there was not one significant change in the text.
unto them were committed the oracles of God ( Rom 3:2 ).
They kept those oracles faithfully, recorded them faithfully and passed them on to us. They had such a high reverence for the name of God, that whenever they wrote the word God, the Elohim, or the El, they would wash their pens, wash their hands, and then dip the pen in fresh ink to write the word Elohim, so did they reverence the title of God. But when they wrote the consonants that represented the name of God in writing, the consonants, before they would write them, they would go in and take a bath, change their clothes, and then take a pen, dip it in fresh ink, and write the consonants, YHVH, those consonants that represented the name of God.
There was no vowels written on these consonants because they did not feel that a man even in his mind was worthy of pronouncing the holy name of God. So they took the copying of scripture as a sacred trust. They realized the advantage that was theirs in having the Word of God given to them. Unto them was given the oracles of God. They were committed to them.
Now, what if some of them do not believe? ( Rom 3:3 )
For they did not all believe. They were apostate, many of them.
shall their unbelief make the faithfulness of God without effect? ( Rom 3:3 )
If man is unfaithful, does that mean that God is then unfaithful or the faithfulness of God without effect?
God forbid ( Rom 3:4 ):
Though some of them did not believe, God will still be faithful to them as a people.
let God be true, and every man a liar; as it is written, That you might be justified when you speak, and might overcome when you are judged ( Rom 3:4 ).
He is quoting the fifty-first Psalm, where David is confessing his sin with Bathsheba before the Lord. He is crying out for mercy, “Have mercy on me, O God, according to the multitude of thy tender mercies, blot out my transgressions, for against thee and thee only have I sinned and done this great iniquity in thy sight, that thy might be justified when you speak. And righteous when you judge.” So he is quoting here that fifty-first Psalm of David, declaring that God when He speaks is right, He is justified in speaking. He is righteous in His judgment.
But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who takes vengeance? [He said,] (I am speaking as a man) ( Rom 3:5 )
Now he is using some of the super silliest kind of arguments that man sometimes takes a truth of God, and then they began to postulate on that truth, they begin to give hypothetical cases or they begin to try to reason out with the human intellect. This is the particular argument that Paul is saying. Here I am. God declares that all men are sinners and that the grace of God abounds to sinners, and God loves to show His grace in the forgiveness of sinful man. Therefore, by my going out and sinning, I am giving God an opportunity to show His righteousness through faith and His glorious grace. So my unrighteousness really is magnifying the righteousness of God, therefore, why would God judge me for being unrighteous? I am just showing how good He is when He forgives. And Paul says,
God forbid: how then can God judge the world? [And then another person says,] Well, the truth of God has really abounded more through my lie ( Rom 3:6-7 )
Now there are people who have some very exciting and remarking testimonies. They are complete lies, but they are exciting and a lot of people get all excited over these glorious testimonies. And many people have accepted the Lord after hearing some of these marvelous testimonies of what God did. Now there are just some pathological liars out there that are going around in pulpits and giving marvelous, interesting stories of how God saved them.
Several years ago there was some fellow who came here to Santa Ana, declared that he was a scientist working in the space program and all of this kind of stuff. He was talking about some new types of machines that had been developed and how that in connecting these machines on people there was the needle that would go positive or negative. So they connected it upon some fellow who was dying, and he was a rank sinner and the thing went off the peg on the negative side, but they connected it to some dear little saint who was dying, and it measures the communication outward. They went off the peg on the positive side and he was getting people all excited. And God appeared to him in a ball of fire and sat next to him in the car, all this kind of stuff. He was around the Orange County area here for a while and spoke in many churches, and gave his remarkable testimony of conversion once he saw that thing peg off to the right, and realized that the communication was going way out beyond man’s ability. Many people got excited and he talked about how that caused him to get on his knees and realize that God was true.
If the truth of God abounded by his lie, then why would God condemn him for lying? Look how many people got saved by his glorious testimony. There are some people that have that kind of a rationale, that the end justifies the means.
More recently in Orange County there was a fellow who claimed to be a rabbi. He was a teacher of one of the large churches in Orange County for a long time claiming to be a rabbi, and his wife has recently written a book exposing the truth about this fellow. But again, declaring to be a converted rabbi, a lot of people were really moved by his testimony and by his teaching of the scripture, because now we have a rabbi teaching from a Christian perspective.
If the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why does God judge me as a sinner? ( Rom 3:7 )
I was lying, but it was for God’s glory that I was lying. Some people were saying about Paul, they said Paul is saying,
(I was slanderously reported, as saying,) Let us do evil, that good might come out of it. [Paul said,] whose damnation is just ( Rom 3:8 ).
If I were God I would have put them away a long time ago. He is patient, so patient to my consternation.
How the world can be thankful I am not God. Man, a person cuts in front of me on the freeway, zap. I appreciate God’s patience towards me. I appreciate that He is long-suffering towards me. I don’t necessarily appreciate His patience towards you. I need it, I want it, oh God, help me. God help me.
But this rationale that people can get caught up in, like we are sort of a special class. God has special toleration for us, because look what we are doing for God. Look at all of this glorious fruit for the kingdom of God, but therefore, God has special toleration for me. Wrong. God will judge.
Paul then asked the question,
are we then better than they? ( Rom 3:9 )
That is, the Jew better than the Gentile?
No, in no wise: for we have already proved that both the Jews and Gentiles are all under sin ( Rom 3:9 );
So it doesn’t make any difference, we all are under sin. So you are no better off being a Jew or Gentile as far as this is concerned; we are all sinners.
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: there are none that understands, there is none that seeks after God ( Rom 3:10-11 ).
Now this is an amazing statement Paul is quoting from the Psalms, but this is an amazing statement that God has declared. He said, “There is none who are seeking after God.” So often we hear people say, “Well, all religions lead to God. After all, if a person is sincere won’t God accept his sincerity? Look at the ways these people are seeking after God. You know, they cut themselves they afflict themselves. They spend these hours in meditation, surely God will accept them, because they are seeking after God.” The scripture says they are not seeking after God. If they are not seeking after God, then what are they seeking after?
The motivation behind most of this, as they will tell you, is that they are seeking after a peace of mind. Those who get into that meditation bit, they testify of that peace of mind, that tranquility that they come to, and that is what they are seeking is a tranquility of mind. They are not really seeking God, but seeking their own tranquility seeking their own peace.
They are all of them gone out of the way ( Rom 3:12 ),
That is, the way of God.
they are together become unprofitable; there is none that is doing good, no, not one ( Rom 3:12 ).
Now he goes on to quote many more scriptures. From the Psalms,
Their throat is an open sepulcher; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known: there is no fear of God before their eyes ( Rom 3:13-18 ).
Now this is God’s indictment, God is speaking through the psalmist and declaring the condition of man apart from God.
Now we know that what things soever the law says, it says to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin ( Rom 3:19-20 ).
Here is one basic mistake that man has made concerning the law of God. God never gave the law to make a person righteous by obeying the law, that was never the intention of the law. For the law cannot make a person righteous. Even if you kept the law, which you haven’t, by the law is the knowledge of sin. That was the purpose of the law: to make the whole world guilty before God, or make the whole world cognizant of their guilt before God. That is why God gave the law.
There are so many who seek to sort of promote and exalt their own righteous works, their own goodness, and there are many people who are daring to come before God on the basis I am a good person or I am a moral person. It is interesting to me today that the Jewish people, for the most part, are seeking an acceptance by God on the basis of their good works.
Last Friday night was Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. It used to be under the covenant that God made with them on the Day of Atonement, the priest would go into the Holy of Holies with the blood of the goat to offer before God for the sins of the nation. But now the Day of Atonement is not the day of the great sacrifice, but the Day of Atonement is the day of reflection where you sit and reflect over the past year over the work that you have done. And you seek to balance out your life so that your good works over balance your bad works. Yom Kippur is now the day of reflection over the good works and over the evil works that you have done, and there is, of course, that endeavor the week before to do enough good works so that when you reflect that day you can tip the scales in the right side. My good works have out numbered my evil.
The law was not given to make one righteous, for if righteousness could come by the law, any law, if God could give us rules tonight to make us righteous, then Christ did not need to die. In fact, His death was in vain. So the law spoke to those who were under the law to stop every mouth. That is, to stop every mouth from boasting in their own righteousness. By the deeds of the law no flesh can be justified in God’s sight, for by the law is only the knowledge of sin. It just shows me where I have failed. Now this is to have a proper understanding of the law, which the Pharisees did not have in the days of Jesus.
They were so misinterpreting the law and using it for the wrong purposes entirely. They were using the law to sort of fortify their feeling of self-righteousness, and Paul talks about his experience as a Pharisee and that righteousness that he had through the law. He said, “Concerning the law, I was blameless. I had it made as a Pharisee,” as far as the righteousness that they sought to achieve through the keeping of the law. But he said, “Those things that were for gain for me I counted loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Jesus Christ for whom I suffer the loss of all things, that I may know Him and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness which is of the law, but the righteousness now which is of Christ through faith” ( Php 3:7-9 ).
Jesus said, “Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees you are not going to enter the kingdom of heaven” ( Mat 5:20 ). Now, for any of you who want to be righteous on your own work, by your own efforts, that ought to discourage you once and forever, because no one was more diligent in their endeavor to keep the law than were the scribes and Pharisees. Unless your righteousness exceeds them you are not going to make it in.
Then Jesus gave the five illustrations that showed the fallacy of their understanding of the law. For in each of the illustrations He was showing that they were interpreting the law in a physical sense, but the law was intended in a spiritual sense. “You have heard that it was said in the law, ‘Thou shall not kill;’ and whosoever kills is in danger of the judgment, but I say unto you, whosoever hates his brother without a cause shall be in danger of judgment” ( Mat 5:21-22 .) “You have heard that it hath been said, ‘Thy shall not commit adultery,’ but I say unto you, whosoever looks on a woman and lust after her in his heart has violated that command” ( Mat 5:27-28 .)
So realizing that the law is spiritual then I realize, though I may have kept the law outwardly, I have violated the law spiritually, thus I am guilty before God and that is the purpose of the law–to make you know that you are guilty before God so that you will seek now a new righteousness.
For the law was a schoolmaster to teach us and to drive us to Jesus Christ. To make us despair of our own selves, to make us try to make us quit trying in our own flesh. To attain a righteous standing before God. That was the purpose of the law, just to make you despair of your own flesh once and forever, so that you would seek the righteousness that God has provided through faith in Jesus Christ. Now if you twist the law, and you use it as an instrument to make you feel very righteous, and you have this sense, “Well, I have kept the law. I am living an honest life. I do my best. I try to be good and all, and I don’t live like those heathens out there,” then you have misunderstood the intent of the law completely and you are missing the righteousness of God.
As Paul was pointing out that the Jew, because he didn’t follow God’s righteousness, did not attain righteousness. However, the poor Gentile who just knew how desperately lost he was discovered the righteousness of God. So by the law no flesh is going to be justified, by the law is the knowledge of sin. But because the law has brought me the knowledge of sin,
Now the righteousness of God without the law is made manifest, it is witnessed to both in the law and in the prophets ( Rom 3:21 );
This righteousness which is by faith, God said to the prophet of Hosea, “The just shall live by faith.” God said to Abraham, “He believed God and it was accounted unto him for righteousness.” This righteousness that God has now given to us apart from the law is revealed.
Even the righteousness of God which is by the faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all of them that believe; for there is no difference: for all of us have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; But all of us can be justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus ( Rom 3:22-24 ):
Tonight if you are aware of your inability to live a righteous life, you have struggled, you have cried out, you have done everything to live the righteous life, but you realize you can’t, you are in good shape. You are a good candidate now for that righteousness that God has revealed through the faith of Jesus Christ. Having come to a despairing in myself and of myself, I am brought to Jesus Christ and now this relationship with God through Him.
Through the redemption that God has provided in Christ Jesus,
For God hath set him forth to be a propitiation through the faith in his blood, to declare God’s righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, when he justifies him who believe in Jesus Christ ( Rom 3:25-26 ).
God is faced with a problem. God created man that He might have fellowship with man, that was God’s intent. Creating a creature with God-like capacities. A creature in His image that would be a self-governing creature as God is self-governing. The capacity to love as God loves, the capacity to know that infinity exists. That he might come into fellowship a loving relationship with that infinite God.
One thing was necessary and that was that this creation use that choice to express his love for God through obedience through faith. Therefore, there had to be an alternate choice, which in this case was the tree in the midst of the garden acknowledging good and evil, so that man could exercise choice. Then God declared, “Of all of the trees that are in the garden you may freely eat except the tree in the middle. For in the day that you eat of that tree you will die a spiritual death.” You will lose your relationship with God. For the effect of sin in a person’s life is always broken relationship with God. “God’s hand is not short that He can not save, His ear is not heavy that He can not hear, your sins have separated you from God” ( Isa 59:1-2 ). So when man sinned, he put himself out of fellowship with God. That relationship with God was broken, thus the purposes of God were thwarted.
Now God still desired fellowship with man, but as long as sin was there man could not fellowship with God. Something had to be done with man’s sin, or else there is no fellowship. Therefore, in order that God might renew fellowship with man, during the old covenant with the Jewish nation, He established a method by which you could take the guilt of your sin and transfer it onto an animal by faith. Bring your ox to the priest, lay your hands on its head and confess on the head of that ox all of your sins. Then the priest would kill the ox and offer it unto God as a sin offering, whereby your sins could be covered by faith, because the ox had died in your place. The death that you deserved because of your sins, because the soul that sins shall surely die. So that was the righteous basis by which God could restore fellowship with man in the Old Testament. As a man would bring the substitute and let it die in his place and then fellowship with God could be restored until man sinned again. If that were still true today and we had sacrifices here and you had to come and bring your animal for a sacrifice and your sins could be forgiven and you could sit here for a little while just fellowshipping with God and enjoy the blessing of God’s presence and all in your life, it probably wouldn’t last too long. Just driving from here to the freeway, just getting out of the parking lot you might blow it. Thus, you would have to, before you could fellowship with God again, bring another sacrifice and get things all cleaned up once more. These sacrifices were all done in faith, because they were looking forward to the sacrifice that God was going to provide for man’s sins.
There is that beautiful story of Abraham when God said unto him, “Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac and offer him as a sacrifice on a mountain that I will show you” ( Gen 22:2 ). Put that alongside of Joh 3:16 ,”For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son.” “Take now thy son, thine only son, Isaac and offer as a sacrifice on the mountain in which I will show you.” So Abraham took his servants and his son Isaac, and they began to journey toward this mount from Hebron. “And after three days they came to the mount and Abraham said to his servant, ‘You stay here and I and the lad will go and worship and will come again.'” As Isaac and his father were walking towards Mount Moriah Isaac said, “Dad, here is the wood for the sacrifice and the fire, but where is the sacrifice?” Abraham said, “Son, the Lord will provide Himself a sacrifice.”
So they came to the mount and Abraham began to put Isaac upon the altar, raised the knife, and God said, “Abraham, that is far enough. We’ve got the picture. Behold, the ram is caught by its horns there in the thicket, take it and offer it as a sacrifice.” Abraham called the place Jehovah-Jirah, the Lord will provide or the Lord sees, and then he said, “For in the mount of the Lord it shall be seen.” Mount Moriah, where Abraham said God will provide Himself a sacrifice so that all of those sacrifices that later were instituted in the law of Moses all looked forward to the fulfillment of the prophecy of Abraham when God would provide Himself a sacrifice. And 2000 years later on Mount Moriah God provided Himself a sacrifice, for it was on the top of Mount Moriah that Jesus was crucified.
God declared His righteousness toward us, and God is righteous when He justifies us, for Jesus took our sins upon Himself. And thus, the judgment of God, righteous judgment of God for sin and death, spiritual death has been fulfilled. So that God is now righteous when He justifies me. There is a righteous basis, for if someone else has stepped in and died in my place. That’s the whole gospel that deals with God being just when He justifies the ungodly.
God has justified me; He has declared me righteous before Him through my faith in the blood of Jesus Christ through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ. Thus, I have received the remission of my sins which are past. So God has shown His righteousness as He is just when He justifies those who believe in Jesus Christ.
Where does that put boasting then? It is excluded ( Rom 3:27 ).
You see, I can’t boast tonight of all of the good that I have done. Of all of the sacrifices that I have made, of the great difficulties of getting those seven golden apples guarded by the multi headed dragon that I bravely faced and killed with my sword after a terrible struggle.
Boasting is excluded, because I am declared righteous by my faith in Jesus Christ, and if there is any boasting to be done it has to be done in Jesus. As Paul said, “God forbid that I should boast save in the cross of Jesus Christ.” All my boasting has to be in what Jesus has done for me, not what I have done for Him. Now it is unfortunate that so often in church the emphasis is on what man should be doing for God. And God help me, He has forgiven me for years I was placing the church under deep guilt trips as I was telling them their failure because they ought to be doing more for God. You ought to be sacrificing more, or you ought to be giving more, you ought to be doing more, you ought to be praying more, you ought to be anything more. And I was emphasizing the work that man should be doing for God. Even helping them, outlining works, giving them little charts to put their stars on, do be a do be and don’t be a . . . you know, the do be’s. God help us. Because the New Testament points us not to what we have done or can do for God, but it points us to what God has done for us.
It points us to the cross, and God forbid that I should glory except in the cross. If I am diligent and I spend two hours a day in prayer, and if I spend four hours a day in the Word of God, and three hours a day on the beach witnessing, then I like to stand up and say, “I’d like to thank the Lord for His goodness to me and I am just glad that I can go out three hours a day and witness on the beach for Jesus. And those four hours a day in the Word are just so precious to me. And those two hours of prayer, my, I wouldn’t give them up for anything.” I am boasting in what I am doing. Everybody says, “Oh, wow! Isn’t he a righteous person?” Now, I am a sinner. I am a hopeless sinner if it were not for the grace of God; I deserve His judgment. But God loved me even though I was a sinner. And He sent His son who also loved me and who took the guilt and the responsibility for my sin and died in my place, and now offers me forgiveness, righteousness, justification, fellowship with God, if I will just believe in the sacrifice and in the work that He has wrought in my behalf.
Therefore, I cannot boast in my works or in my goodness. And when you get to heaven, it isn’t going to be a big bragging session and we all get around and tell of all the marvelous things we did for God on the earth. Though, when we get to heaven we will just be that glorious, “Jesus paid it all, all to Him I owe. Sin hath left its crimson stain, but He washed me white as snow.” And through the ages to come we will be rejoicing in the grace of God through Jesus Christ, whereby I have access to the Father–fellowship with God. Where is boasting then? It is excluded.
By what law? By the law of works? No ( Rom 3:27 );
No, no. If I can be righteous by works then boasting would be in vogue. But it is excluded,
because of the law of faith ( Rom 3:27 ).
How can I boast in the faith that God has given to me?
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds [or the works] of the law ( Rom 3:28 ).
That is the conclusion.
For is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also the God of the heathen? Yes, of the heathen also: Now seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith. Do we then make void the law through faith? No, God forbid: we are establishing the law ( Rom 3:29-31 ).
In other words, we are establishing the law for the purpose that the law was given. It forces me to take God’s alternate. The law shows me that I can’t be having a standing before Him through my own efforts, and so I’ve established the law for the purpose which God gave the law by declaring that the law cannot justify me or make me righteous, but the law can only bring me to despair of myself so that I take God’s alternate plan of faith in Jesus Christ.
“
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Rom 3:1. What advantage then hath the Jew? Or what profit is there of circumcision?
If, after all, both Jew and Gentiles were under sin, what advantage had the Jew by the covenant under which he lived? Or what was the benefit to him of the circumcision which was his distinctive mark?
Rom 3:2. Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
The Jews were Gods chronicle-keepers. They had to guard the holy Books, the oracles of God. They had also to preserve the knowledge of the truth by those divers rites and ceremonies by which God was pleased to reveal himself of old time.
Rom 3:3. For what if some did not believe? Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
Did he not, after all, bless the Jews though among them were unbelievers?
Could it be that their unbelief would turn God from his purpose to bless the chosen people? Would their want of faith affect Gods faithfulness?
Rom 3:4. God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, that thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
However faithless men might be, God was still true and faithful. Paul quotes the Septuagint, which thus renders Davids words.
Rom 3:5. But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say?
If it so turns out, that even mans sin makes the holiness of God the more illustrious, what shall we say?
Rom 3:5. Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man)
Paul spoke as a mere carnal man might be supposed to speak. If ever we are obliged, for the sake of argument, to ask a question which is almost blasphemous, let us do it very guardedly, and say something to show that we really do not adopt the language as our own, just as Paul says, I speak as a man. If the very sin of man is made to turn to the glory of God, is God unjust in punishing that sin?
Rom 3:6. God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?
God will judge the world; and he does judge the world even now. There are judgments against nations already executed, and recorded on the page of history. If God were unjust, how could he judge the world?
Rom 3:7. For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?
If God has even turned the opposition of evil men to the establishment of his truth, as he has often done; why, then, are men punished for it? These are deep, dark questions, which come out of the proud heart of man, and Paul ventures to answer them.
Rom 3:8. And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? Whose damnation is just.
We never said, we never even thought, that we might do evil that good should come; nay, if all the good in the world could come of a single evil action, we have no right to do it. We must never do evil with the hope of advancing Gods cause. If God chooses to turn evil into good, as he often does, that is no reason why we should do evil; and it is no justification of sin. The murder of Christ at Calvary has brought the greatest possible benefit to us; yet it was a high crime against God, the greatest of all crimes, when man turned deicide, and slew the Son of God.
Rom 3:9-10. What then? Are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are under sin; as it is written.
Paul had already proved in the Epistle that both Jews and Gentiles were guilty before God. Now he quotes a set of texts from Israels own holy Books, to show the universal depravity of men. Notice how he rings the changes on the words all and none.
Rom 3:11-12. There is none righteous, no, not one: there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
This is the character of all unregenerate men. It is a true description of the whole race of mankind, whether Jews or Gentiles. In their natural state, there is non righteous . . . there is none that seeketh after God . . . there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Rom 3:13. Their throat is an open sepulcher; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
Paul does not use flattering words, as those preachers do who prate about the dignity of human nature. Man was a noble creature when he was made in the image of God; but sin blotted out all his dignity.
Rom 3:14-19. Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known: there is no fear of God before their eyes. Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law:
The Jews are comprehended here, for they are specially under the law. The whole chosen seed of Israel, highly privileged as they were, are described in these terrible words that we have been reading, which Paul quoted from their own sacred Books.
Rom 3:19. That every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
That is the true condition of the whole world, guilty before God. This is the right attitude for the whole human race, to stand with its finger on its lip, having nothing to say as to why it should not be condemned.
Rom 3:20. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
All the law does, is to show us how sinful we are. Paul has been quoting from the sacred Scriptures; and truly, they shed a lurid light upon the condition of human nature. The light can show us our sin; but it cannot take it away. The law of the Lord is like a looking-glass. Now, a looking-glass is a capital thing for finding out where the spots are on your face; but you cannot wash in a looking-glass, you cannot get rid of the spots by looking in the glass. The law is intended to show a man how much he needs cleansing; but the law cannot cleanse him. By the law is the knowledge of sin. The law proves that we are condemned, but it does not bring us our pardon.
Rom 3:21-22. But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon them that believe:
We have no righteousness of our own; but God gives us a righteousness through faith in Christ; and he gives that to everyone who believes.
Rom 3:22-23. For there is no difference: for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
There are degrees of guilt; but all men have sinned. There is no difference in that respect, whatever gradations there may be in sinners.
Rom 3:24. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Dear hearers, are you all justified, that is, made just, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus? You are certainly all guilty in the sight of God; have you all been made righteous by faith in the redemption accomplished on the cross by Christ Jesus our Lord? I beg you to consider this question most seriously; and if you must truthfully answer, No, may God make you tremble, and drive you to your knees in penitence to cry to him for pardon!
Rom 3:25. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
God holds back the axe which, were it not for his forbearance, would cut down the barren tree. He still forbears, and he is ready to pardon and blot out all the past if you will but believe in his dear Son.
Rom 3:26-27. To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him who believeth in Jesus.Where is boasting then?
Where is it? It is to be found in a great many people. It is common enough; but where ought it to be? Where does it get a footing? It is shut out! There is no room for boasting in the heart that receives Christ. If a man were saved by works, he would have whereof to glory; boasting would not be shut out. But as salvation is all of grace, through faith in Christ, boasting is barred out in the dark, and faith gratefully ascribes all praise to God.
Rom 3:27-31. It is excluded. By what law? Of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles, also: seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
Whether Jews or Gentiles, there was no salvation for them by the works of the law; the only way in which the circumcised or the uncircumcised could be justified was by faith. This principle does not make void Gods law; on the contrary, it establishes it, and sets it on the only right and solid foundation. The gospel of the grace of God is the best vindication of his law.
Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible
Rom 3:1. , what). Pauls usual form of bringing in an objection.-) then. Since circumcision is unprofitable without observing the law, and since being a Jew outwardly is of no avail, what advantage does the latter possess, and of what profit is the former? It therefore must follow, that the Jews have no peculiar privileges whatever. Paul denies this conclusion. There are innumerable exceptions taken against the doctrine set forth in this epistle, by the perverseness of the Jews, and of mankind at large; but Paul sweeps them all away.- , peculiar advantage), , over [as compared with] the Gentiles. This point is taken up at Rom 3:2- , the profit of circumcision) See on this subject ch. Rom 2:25.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Rom 3:1
Rom 3:1
What advantage then hath the Jew?-If both the Gentiles and the Jews are in sin and under condemnation, what profit has it been to the Jews that God has called them and made them his favored people?
or what is the profit of circumcision?-And if the circumcision equally with the uncircumcision must keep the law to be of benefit, what profit is there in being circumcised?
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Paul here turned to a brief discussion of certain objections. First, “What advantage, then, hath the Jew?” He replied, “Much, every way.” He then mentioned only one, which he spoke of as being “first of all,” meaning of supreme importance, “that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.” Therein lay the supreme advantage of the Jew.
Then arises a new question. If man’s faith fails, will God be unfaithful? To this the apostle replied that is it impossible for God to be unfaithful. The faithfulness of God is demonstrated by His unchanging attitude toward man. If man sins, God judges him; if man repents, God forgives him.
And yet still another question logically follows. If sin is the means of glorifying God by demonstrating His faithfulness, is it righteous to punish the sinner? The reply is that unless God punishes sin He has no basis on which to judge the world at all.
So far, the whole argument presents a picture of humanity from the divine viewpoint. It is so terrible in itself as to create a sense of hopelessness in us.
With the words, “but now,” the apostle began the declaration of the Gospel. The whole is summarized in the statement that “a righteousness of God ha& been manifested.” This righteousness of God is at the disposal of those who believe.
The apostle then told of the great provision of grace by first naming the foundation blessing, or justification, “by His grace”; and then announcing the medium through which grace has operated to that end, “the redemption,” a word fraught with infinite meaning, to be more fully unfolded as the argument proceeds; and finally naming the Person, “Christ Jesus,” who has accomplished the work of redemption, which issues in the justification of the sinner.
The work of the Cross is set at the heart of this Evangel of salvation, and is seen to be a fulfilment of God’s purpose, by God’s Son, for the vindication of God’s righteousness, in the action of God’s forbearance.
The result is now set forth in a statement that is as startling as it is gracious: “That He might Himself be just,” or righteous; “and the Justifier,” or the One who accounts as righteous “him that hath faith in Jesus.” This is the glorious Evangel.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
CASUISTICAL OBJECTIONS ANSWERED
3:1-8. This argument may suggest three objections: (i) If the moral Gentile is better off than the immoral Jew, what becomes of the Jews advantages?-Answer. He still has many. His (e.g.) are the promises (vv. 1-2). (ii) But has not the Jews unbelief cancelled those promises?-Answer. No unbelief on the part of man can affect the pledged word of God: it only serves to enhance His faithfulness (vv. 3, 4). (iii) If that is the result of his action, why should man be judged?-Answer. He certainly will be judged: we may not say (as I am falsely accused of saying), Do evil that good may come (vv. 5-8).
1 If the qualifications which God requires are thus inward and spiritual, an objector may urge, What becomes of the privileged position of the Jew, his descent from Abraham, and the like? What does he gain by his circumcision? 2 He does gain much on all sides. The first gain is that to the Jews were committed the prophecies of the Messiah. [Here the subject breaks off; a fuller enumeration is given in ch. 9:4, 5.
3 You say, But the Jews by their unbelief have forfeited their share in those prophecies. And I admit that some Jews have rejected Christianity, in which they are fulfilled. What then? The promises of God do not depend on man. He will keep His word, whatever man may do. 4 To suggest otherwise were blasphemy. Nay, God must be seen to be true, though all mankind are convicted of falsehood. Just as in Psa_51 the Psalmist confesses that the only effect of his own sin will be that (in forensic metaphor) God will be declared righteous in His sayings [the promises just mentioned], and gain His case when it is brought to trial.
5 A new objection arises. If our unrighteousness is only a foil to set off the righteousness of God would not God be unjust who punishes men for sin? (Speaking of God as if He were man can hardly be avoided.) 6 That too were blasphemy to think! If any such objection were sound, God could not judge the world. But we know that He will judge it. Therefore the reasoning must be fallacious.
7 If, you say, as in the case before us, the truthfulness of God in performing His promises is only thrown into relief by my infidelity, which thus redounds to His glory, why am I still like other offenders () brought up for judgement as a sinner?
8 So the objector. And I know that this charge of saying Let us do evil that good may come is brought with slanderous exaggeration against me-as if the stress which I lay on faith compared with works meant, Never mind what your actions are, provided only that the end you have in view is right.
All I will say is that the judgement which these sophistical reasoners will receive is richly deserved.
1 ff. It is characteristic of this Epistle that St. Paul seems to imagine himself face to face with an opponent, and that he discusses and answers arguments which an opponent might bring against him (so 3:1 ff., 4:1 ff., 6:1 ff., 15 ff., 7:7 ff.). No doubt this is a way of presenting the dialectical process in his own mind. But at the same time it is a way which would seem to have been suggested by actual experience of controversy with Jews and the narrower Jewish Christians. We are told expressly that the charge of saying Let us do evil that good may come was brought as a matter of fact against the Apostle (ver. 8). And 6:1, 15 restate this charge in Pauline language. The Apostle as it were takes it up and gives it out again as if it came in the logic of his own thought. And the other charge of levelling down all the Jews privileges, of ignoring the Old Testament and disparaging its saints, was one which must as inevitably have been brought against St. Paul as the like charges were brought against St. Stephen (Act 6:13 f.). It is probable however that St. Paul had himself wrestled with this question long before it was pointed against him as a weapon in controversy; and he propounds it in the order in which it would naturally arise in that stress of reasoning, pro and con., which went to the shaping of his own system. The modified form in which the question comes up the second time (ver. 9) shows-if our interpretation is correct-that St. Paul is there rather following out his own thought than contending with an adversary.
1. . That which encircles a thing necessarily lies outside it. Hence would seem to have a latent meaning beyond, which is appropriated rather by , , but comes out in , that which is in excess, over and above.
2. : intended to be followed by , but the line of argument is broken off and not resumed. A list of privileges such as might have followed here is given in ch. 9:4.
: om. B D* E G minusc. pauc., verss. plur., Chrys. Orig.-lat. al., [] WH.
. , in the sense of entrust, confide, takes acc. of the thing entrusted, dat. of the person; e. g. Joh 2:24 [rather or ] . In the passive the dat. becomes nom., and the acc. remains unchanged (Buttmann, pp. 175, 189, 190; Winer, xxxii. 5 [p. 287]; cf. 1Co 9:17; Gal 2:7).
. St. Paul might mean by this the whole of the O. T. regarded as the Word of God, but he seems to have in view rather those utterances in it which stand out as most unmistakably Divine; the Law as given from Sinai and the promises relating to the Messiah.
The old account of as a dimin. of is probably correct, though Mey.-W.. make it neut. of on the ground that is the proper dimin. The form is rather a strengthened dimin., which by a process common in language took the place of when it acquired the special sense of oracle. From Herod. downwards = oracle as a brief condensed saying; and so it came to = any inspired, divine utterance: e.g. in Philo of the prophecies and of the ten commandments ( is the title of Philos treatise). So in LXX the expression is used of the word of the Lord five times in Isaiah and frequently in the Psalms (no less than seventeen times in Psa_119 [118]). From this usage it was natural that it should be transferred to the sayings of the Lord Jesus (Polyc. ad Phil. vii. 1 : cf. Iren. Adv. Haer. 1 praef.; also Weiss, Einl. 5. 4). But from the time of Philo onwards the word was used of any sacred writing, whether discourse or narrative; so that it is a disputed point whether the which Papias ascribes to St. Matthew, as well as his own (Eus. H. E. III. xxxix.16 and 1) were or were not limited to discourse (see especially Lightfoot, Ess. on Supern. Rel. p. 172 ff.).
3. . Do these words refer to unbelief (Mey. Gif. Lid. Oltr. Go.) or to unfaithfulness (De W. Weiss Lips. Va.)? Probably, on the whole, the former: because (i) the main point in the context is the disbelief in the promises of the O. T. and the refusal to accept them as fulfilled in Christ; (ii) chaps. 9-11 show that the problem of Israels unbelief weighed heavily on the Apostles mind; (iii) unbelief is the constant sense of the word ( occurs seven times, in which the only apparent exception to this sense 2Ti 2:13, and eleven times, with no clear exception); (iv) there is a direct parallel in ch. 11:20 , . At the same time the one sense rather suggests than excludes the other; so that the of man is naturally contrasted with the of God (cf. Va.).
: faithfulness to His promises; cf. Lam 3:23 : Ps. Sol. 8:35 .
. (from causative and = ) = to render inert or inactive: a characteristic word with St. Paul, occurring twenty-five times in his writings (including 2 Thess. Eph_2 Tim.), and only twice elsewhere (Lk. Heb.); = (i) in a material sense, to make sterile or barren, of soil Luk 13:7, cf. Rom 6:6 , that the body as an instrument of sin may be paralysed, rendered powerless; (ii) in a figurative sense, to render invalid, abrogate, abolish ( Gal 3:17; Rom 3:31).
4. : a formula of negation, repelling with horror something previously suggested. Fourteen of the fifteen N. T. instances are in Pauls writings, and in twelve of them it expresses the Apostles abhorrence of an inference which he fears may be falsely drawn from his argument (Burton, M. and T. 177; cf. also Lft. on Gal 2:17).
It is characteristic of the vehement impulsive style of this group of Epp. that the phrase is confined to them (ten times in Rom., once in 1 Cor., twice in Gal.). It occurs five times in LXX, not however standing alone as here, but worked into the body of the sentence (cf. Gen 44:7, Gen 44:17; Jos 22:29, Jos 22:24:16; 1Ki 20:3, 1Ki 21:3).
: see on 1:3 above; the transition which the verb denotes is often from a latent condition to an apparent condition, and so here, prove to be, be seen to be.
: as keeping His plighted word.
: in asserting that Gods promises have not been fulfilled.
: Even as it stands written. The quotation is exact from LXX of Psa 51:6 [50:6]. Note the mistranslations in LXX (which St. Paul adopts), (or ) for insons sis, (pass.) for in iudicando or dum iudicas. The sense of the original is that the Psalmist acknowledges the justice of Gods judgement upon him. The result of his sin is that God is pronounced righteous in His sentence, free from blame in His judging. St. Paul applies it as if the Most High Himself were put upon trial and declared guiltless in respect to the promises which He has fulfilled, though man will not believe in their fulfilment.
: points to an unexpressed condition, in case a decision is given.
: that thou mightest be pronounced righteous by the judgement of mankind; see p. 30 f. above, and compare Mat 11:19 (v. l. : cf. Luk 7:35) . Test. XII Patr. Sym. 6 . Ps. Son 2:16 . The usage occurs repeatedly in this book; see Ryle and James ad loc.
: not pleadings (Va.) but sayings, i. e. the just mentioned. probably = judicial sentence.
: like vincere, of gaining a suit, opp. to : the full phrase is (Eur. El. 955, &c.).
, B G K L &c.; A D E, minusc. aliq. Probably is right, because of the agreement of A with the older types of Western Text, thus representing two great families. The reading in B apparently belongs to the small Western element in that MS., which would seem to be allied to that in G rather than to that in D. There is a similar fluctuation in MSS. of the LXX: is the reading of B(def. A), of some fourteen cursives. The text of LXX used by St. Paul differs not seldom from that of the great uncials.
: probably not mid. (to enter upon trial, go to law, lit. get judgment for oneself) as Mey. Go. Va. Lid., but pass. as in ver. 7 (so Vulg. Weiss Kautzsch, &c.; see the arguments from the usage of LXX and in Kautzsch, De Vet. Test. Locis a Paulo allegatis, p. 24 n).
5. : a general statement, including . In like manner is general, though the particular instance which St. Paul has in his mind is the faithfulness of God to His promises.
: () has in N. T. two conspicuous meanings: (i) to bring together as two persons, to introduce or commend to one another (e.g. Rom 16:1; 2Co 3:1; 2Co 4:2; 2Co 5:12, &c.; cf. 2Co 3:1); (ii) to put together or make good by argument, to prove, establish (compositis collectisque quae rem contineant argumentis aliquid doceo Fritzsche), as in Rom 5:8; 2Co 7:11; Gal 2:18 (where see Lft. and Ell.).
Both meanings are recognized by Hesych. ( , , , ); but it is strange that neither comes out clearly in the uses of the word in LXX; the second is found in Susann. 61 , (Theod.).
: another phrase, like , which is characteristic of this Epistle, where it occurs seven times; not elsewhere in N. T.
: the form of question shows that a negative answer is expected ( originally meant Dont say that, &c.).
: most exactly, the inflicter of the anger (Va.). The reference is to the Last Judgement: see on 1:18, 12:19.
Burton however makes strictly equivalent to a relative clause, and like a relative clause suggest a reason (Who visiteth = because He visiteth) M. and T. 428.
: a form of phrase which is also characteristic of this group of Epistles, where the eager argumentation of the Apostle leads him to press the analogy between human and divine things in a way that he feels calls for apology. The exact phrase recurs only in Gal 3:15; but comp. also 1Co 9:8 ; 2Co 11:17 , .
6. : St. Paul and his readers alike held as axiomatic the belief that God would judge the world. But the objection just urged was inconsistent with that belief, and therefore must fall to the ground.
: since, if that were so, if the inflicting of punishment necessarily implied injustice. gets the meaning if so, if not (or else), from the context, the clause to which it points being supposed to be repeated: here sc. (cf. Buttmann, Gr. of N. T. Gk. p. 359).
: all mankind.
7. The position laid down in ver. 5 is now discussed from the side of man, as it had just been discussed from the side of God.
A minusc. pauc., Vulg. cod. Boh., Jo.-Damasc., Tisch. WH. text. RV. text.; B D E G K L P &c., Vulg. Syrr., Orig.-lat. Chrys. al., WH. marg. RV. marg. The second reading may be in its origin Western.
: the truthfulness of God in keeping His promises; , the falsehood of man in denying their fulfilment (as in ver. 4).
: I too, as well as others, though my falsehood thus redounds to Gods glory. St. Paul uses the first person from motives of delicacy, just as in 1Co 4:6 he transfers by a fiction (Dr. Fields elegant rendering of ) to himself and his friend Apollos what really applied to his opponents.
8. There are two trains of thought in the Apostles mind: (i) the excuse which he supposes to be put forward by the unbeliever that evil may be done for the sake of good; (ii) the accusation brought as a matter of fact against himself of saying that evil might be done for the sake of good. The single clause is made to do duty for both these trains of thought, in the one case connected in idea and construction with , in the other with . This could be brought out more clearly by modern devices of punctuation: , [] – , – … There is a very similar construction in vv. 25, 26, where the argument works up twice over to the same words, [] , and the words which follow the second time are meant to complete both clauses, the first as well as the second. It is somewhat similar when in ch. 2 ver. 16 at once carries on and completes vv. 15 and 13.
St. Paul was accused (no doubt by actual opponents) of Antinomianism. What he said was, The state of righteousness is not to be attained through legal works; it is the gift of God. He was represented as saying therefore it does not matter what a man does-an inference which he repudiates indignantly, not only here but in 6:1 ff., 15 ff.
… This points back to ; the plea which such persons put in will avail them nothing; the judgement (of God) which will fall upon them is just. St. Paul does not argue the point, or say anything further about the calumny directed against himself; he contents himself with brushing away an excuse which is obviously unreal.
UNIVERSAL FAILURE TO ATTAIN TO RIGHTEOUSNESS
3:9-20. If the case of us Jews is so bad, are the Gentiles any better? No. The same accusation covers both. The Scriptures speak of the universality of human guilt, which is laid down in Psa_14 and graphically described in Pss. 5, 140, Psa 5:10, in Isa_59, and again in Psa_34. And if the Jew is equally guilty with the Gentile, still less can he escape punishment; for the Law which threatens him with punishment is his own. So then the whole system of Law and works done in fulfilment of Law, has proved a failure. Law can reveal sin, but not remove it.
9 To return from this digression. What inference are we to draw? Are the tables completely turned? Are we Jews not only equalled but surpassed ( passive) by the Gentiles? Not at all. There is really nothing to choose between Jews and Gentiles. The indictment which we have just brought against both (in 1:18-32, 2:17-29) proves that they are equally under the dominion of sin. 10The testimony of Scripture is to the same effect. Thus in Psa_14 [here with some abridgment and variation], the Psalmist complains that he cannot find a single righteous man, 11 that there is none to show any intelligence of moral and religious truth, none to show any desire for the knowledge of God. 12 They have all (he says) turned aside from the straight path. They are like milk that has turned sour and bad. There is not so much as a single right-doer among them. 13 This picture of universal wickedness may be completed from such details as those which are applied to the wicked in Psa 5:9 [exactly quoted]. Just as a grave stands yawning to receive the corpse that will soon fill it with corruption, so the throat of the wicked is only opened to vent forth depraved and lying speech. Their tongue is practised in fraud. Or in Psa 140:3 [also exactly quoted]: the poison-bag of the asp lies under their smooth and flattering lips. 14 So, as it is described in Psa 10:7, throat, tongue, and lips are full of nothing but cursing and venom. 15 Then of Israel it is said [with abridgment from LXX of Isa 59:7, Isa 59:8]: They run with eager speed to commit murder. 16 Their course is marked by ruin and misery. 17 With smiling paths of peace they have made no acquaintance. 18 To sum up the character of the ungodly in a word [from Psa_36(35):1 LXX]: The fear of God supplies no standard for their actions.
19 Thus all the world has sinned. And not even the Jew can claim exemption from the consequences of his sin. For when the Law of Moses denounces those consequences it speaks especially to the people to whom it was given. By which it was designed that the Jew too might have his mouth stopped from all excuse, and that all mankind might be held accountable to God.
20 This is the conclusion of the whole argument. By works of Law (i. e. by an attempted fulfilment of Law) no mortal may hope to be declared righteous in Gods sight. For the only effect of Law is to open mens eyes to their own sinfulness, not to enable them to do better. That method, the method of works, has failed. A new method must be found.
9. ; What then [follows]? Not with , because that would require in reply , not .
is explained in three ways: as intrans. in the same sense as the active , as trans. with its proper middle force, and as passive. (i) mid. = (praecellimus eos Vulg.; and so the majority of commentators, ancient and modern, ; Euthym.-Zig. ; Theoph. Do we think ourselves better? Gif.). But no examples of this use are to be found, and there seems to be no reason why St. Paul should not have written , the common form in such contexts. (ii) trans. in its more ordinary middle sense, put forward as an excuse or pretext (Do we excuse ourselves? RV. marg., Have we any defence? Mey. Go.). But then the object must be expressed, and as we have just seen cannot be combined with because of . (iii) passive, Are we excelled? Are we Jews worse off (than the Gentiles)? a rare use, but still one which is sufficiently substantiated (cf. Field, Ot. Norv. III ad loc.). Some of the best scholars (e. g. Lightfoot, Field) incline to this view, which has been adopted in the text of RV. The principal objection to it is from the context. St. Paul has just asserted (ver. 2) that the Jew has an advantage over the Gentile: how then does he come to ask if the Gentile has an advantage over the Jew? The answer would seem to be that a different kind of advantage is meant. The superiority of the Jew to the Gentile is historic, it lies in the possession of superior privileges; the practical equality of Jew and Gentile is in regard to their present moral condition (ch. 2:17-29 balanced against ch. 1:18-32). In this latter respect St. Paul implies that Gentile and Jew might really change places (2:25-29). A few scholars (Olsh. Va.Lid.) take as pass., but give it the same sense as , Are we (Jews) preferred (to the Gentiles) in the sight of God?
: v. l. D* G, 31; Antiochene Fathers (Chrys. [ed. Field] Theodt. Severianus), also Orig.-lat. Ambrstr. (some MSS. but not the best, tenemus amplius): a gloss explaining . in the same way as Vulg. and the later Greek commentators quoted above. A L read .
. Strictly speaking should qualify , not altogether, not entirely, as in 1Co 5:10 : but in some cases, as here, qualifies , altogether not, entirely not, i.e. not at all (nequaquam Vulg., Theoph.). Compare the similar idiom in ; and see Win. Gr. lxi. 5.
: in the section 1:18-2:29.
. In Biblical Greek with dat. has given place entirely to with acc. Mat 8:9 is a strong case. The change has already taken place in LXX; e.g Deu 33:3 , .
10. The long quotation which follows, made up of a number of passages taken from different parts of the O. T., and with no apparent break between them, is strictly in accordance with the Rabbinical practice. A favourite method was that which derived its name from the stringing together of beads (Charaz), when a preacher having quoted a passage or section from the Pentateuch, strung on to it another and like-sounding, or really similar, from the Prophets and the Hagiographa (Edersheim, Life and Times, &c. i. 449). We may judge from this instance that the first quotation did not always necessarily come from the Pentateuch-though no doubt there is a marked tendency in Christian as compared with Jewish writers to equalize the three divisions of the O. T. Other examples of such compounded quotations are Rom 9:25 f.; 27 f.; 11:26 f.; 34 f.; 12:19 f.; 2Co 6:16. Here the passages are from Psa_14[13]:1-3 (= Psa 53:1-3 [52:2-4]), ver. 1 free, ver. 2 abridged, ver. 3 exact; 5:9 [10] exact; 140:3 [139:4] exact: 10:7 [9:28] free; Isa 59:7, Isa 59:8 abridged; Psa_36 [35]. 1. The degree of relevance of each of these passages to the argument is indicated by the paraphrase: see also the additional note at the end of ch. 10.
As a whole this conglomerate of quotations has had a curious history. The quotations in N.T. frequently react upon the text of O.T., and they have done so here: vv. 13-18 got imported bodily into Psa_14 [13 LXX] as an appendage to ver. 4 in the common text of the LXX ( , i.e. the unrevised text current in the time of Origen). They are still found in Codd. * B R U and many cursive MSS. of LXX (om. c a A), though the Greek commentators on the Psalms do not recognize them. From interpolated MSS. such as these they found their way into Lat.-Vet., and so into Jeromes first edition of the Psalter (the Roman), also into his second edition (the Gallican, based upon Origens Hexapla), though marked with an obelus after the example of Origen. The obelus dropped out, and they are commonly printed in the Vulgate text of the Psalms, which is practically the Gallican. From the Vulgate they travelled into Coverdales Bible (a.d. 1535); from thence into Matthews (Rogers) Bible, which in the Psalter reproduces Coverdale (a.d. 1537), and also into the Great Bible (first issued by Cromwell in 1539, and afterwards with a preface by Cranmer, whence it also bears the name of Cranmers Bible, in 1540). The Psalter of the Great Bible was incorporated in the Book of Common Prayer, in which it was retained as being familiar and smoother to sing, even in the later revision which substituted elsewhere the Authorized Version of 1611. The editing of the Great Bible was due to Coverdale, who put an * to the passages found in the Vulgate but wanting in the Hebrew. These marks however had the same fate which befell the obeli of Jerome. They were not repeated in the Prayer-Book; so that English Churchmen still read the interpolated verses in Psa_14 with nothing to distinguish them from the rest of the text. Jerome himself was well aware that these verses were no part of the Psalm. In his commentary on Isaiah, lib. 16, he notes that St. Paul quoted Isa 59:7, Isa 59:8 in Ep. to Rom., and he adds, quod multi ignorantes, de tertio decimo psalmo sumptum putant, qui versus [] in editione Vulgata [i. e. the of the LXX] additi sunt et in Hebraico non habentur (Hieron. Opp. ed. Migne, iv. 601; comp. the preface to the same book, ibid. col. 568 f.; also the newly discovered Commentarioli in Psalmos, ed. Morin, 1895, p. 24 f.).
10. Some have thought that this verse was not part of the quotation, but a summary by St. Paul of what follows. It does indeed present some variants from the original, for and for . In the LXX this clause is a kind of refrain which is repeated exactly in ver. 3. St. Paul there keeps to his text; but we cannot be surprised that in the opening words he should choose a simpler form of phrase which more directly suggests the connexion with his main argument. The shall live by faith; but till the coming of Christianity there was no true and no true faith. The verse runs too much upon the same lines as the Psalm to be other than a quotation, though it is handled in the free and bold manner which is characteristic of St. Paul.
11. : non est qui intelligat (rather than qui intelligit); Anglic, there is none to understand. [But A B G, and perhaps Latt. Orig.-lat. Ambrstr., WH. text read , as also (B)C WH. text , without the art. after LXX. This would = non est intelligens, non est requirens Deum (Vulg.) There is no one of understanding, there is no inquirer after God.]
: on the form see Win. Gr. xiv, 16 (Exo_8; xiv, 3 E. T.); Hort, Intr. Notes on Orthog. p. 167; also for the accentuation, Fri. p. 174 f. Both forms, and , are found, and either accentuation, or , may be adopted: probably the latter is to be preferred; cf. from Mar 1:34, Mar 11:16.
12. : one and all.
: = to go bad, become sour, like milk; comp. the of Mat 25:30.
(sine artic.) A B G &c. WH. text.
= goodness in the widest sense, with the idea of utility rather than specially of kindness, as in 2:4.
: cp. the Latin idiom ad unum omnes (Vulg. literally usque ad unum). B 67**, WH. marg. omit the second [ ]. The readings of B and its allies in these verses are open to some suspicion of assimilating to a text of LXX. In ver. 14 B 17 add ( ) corresponding to in Bs text of Psa 10:7 [9:28].
13. . The LXX of Psa 5:9 [10] corresponds pretty nearly to Heb. The last clause = rather linguam suam blandam reddunt (poliunt), or perhaps lingua sua blandiuntur (Kautzsch, p. 34): their tongue do they make smooth Cheyne; smooth speech glideth from their tongue De Witt.
: Win. Gr. xiii, 14 (Exo_8; xiii, 2 f. E. T.). The termination -, extended from imperf. and 2nd aor. of verbs in – to verbs in -, is widely found; it is common in LXX and in Alexandrian Greek, but by no means confined to it; it is frequent in Boeotian inscriptions, and is called by one grammarian a Boeotian form, as by others Alexandrian.
: Psa 140:3 [139:4]. The position of the poison-bag of the serpent is rightly described. The venom is more correctly referred to the bite (as in Num 21:9; Pro 23:32), than to the forked tongue (Job 20:16): see art. Serpent in D. B.
14.Psa 10:7 somewhat freely from LXX [9:28]: . St. Paul retains the rel. but changes it into the plural: B 17, Cypr., WH. marg.
: more lit. = fraudes.
15-17. This quotation of Isa 59:7, Isa 59:8 is freely abridged from the LXX; and as it is also of some interest from its bearing upon the text of the LXX used by St. Paul, it may be well to give the original and the quotation side by side.
Rom 3:15-17. Isa 59:7, Isa 59:8.
, . [ ] [ ]. [ ].
Theodotion, and probably also Aquila and Symmachus. [From the Hexapla this reading has got into several MSS. of LXX.]
(for ) A : 1 B Q*, &c.: A Q1 marg. (Q = Cod. Marchalianus, XII Holmes) minusc. aliq.
19. What is the meaning of this verse? Does it mean that the passages just quoted are addressed to Jews ( = O. T.; , Euthym.-Zig.), and therefore they are as much guilty before God as the Gentiles? So most commentators. Or does it mean that the guilt of the Jews being now proved, as they sinned they must also expect punishment, the Law ( = the Pentateuch) affirming the connexion between sin and punishment. So Gif. Both interpretations give a good sense. [For though (i) does not strictly prove that all men are guilty but only that the Jews are guilty, this was really the main point which needed proving, because the Jews were apt to explain away the passages which condemned them, and held that-whatever happened to the Gentiles-they would escape.] The question really turns upon the meaning of . It is urged, (i) that there is only a single passage in St. Paul where clearly = O. T. (1Co 14:21, a quotation of Isa 28:11): compare however Joh 10:34 (= Psa 82:6), 15:25 (= Psa 35:19); (ii) that in the corresponding clause, must = the Law, in the narrower sense; (iii) that in ver. 21 the Law is expressly distinguished from the Prophets.
Yet these arguments are hardly decisive: for (i) the evidence is sufficient to show that St. Paul might have used in the wider sense; for this one instance is as good as many; and (ii) we must not suppose that St. Paul always rigidly distinguished which sense he was using; the use of the word in one sense would call up the other (cf. Note on in ch. 5:12).
Oltr. also goes a way of his own, but makes = Law in the abstract (covering at once for the Gentile the law of conscience, and for the Jew the law of Moses), which is contrary to the use of .
: calls attention to the substance of what is spoken, to the outward utterance; cf. esp. McClellan, Gospels, p. 383 ff.
: cf. 1:20, 2:1; the idea comes up at each step in the argument.
: not exactly guilty before God, but answerable to God. takes gen. of the penalty; dat. of the person injured to whom satisfaction is due ( Plato, Legg. 846 B). So here: all mankind has offended against God, and owes Him satisfaction. Note the use of a forensic term.
20. : because, not therefore, as AV. (see on 1:19). Mankind is liable for penalties as against God, because there is nothing else to afford them protection. Law can open mens eyes to sin, but cannot remove it. Why this is so is shown in 7:7 ff.
: shall be pronounced righteous, certainly not shall be made righteous (Lid.); the whole context ( , , ) has reference to a judicial trial and verdict.
: man in his weakness and frailty (1Co 1:29; 1Pe 1:24).
: clear knowledge; see on 1:28, 32.
THE NEW SYSTEM
3:21-26. Here then the new order of things comes in. In it is offered a Righteousness which comes from God but embraces man, by no deserts of his but as a free gift on the part of God. This righteousness, (i) though attested by the Sacred Books, is independent of any legal system (ver. 21); (ii) it is apprehended by faith in Christ, and is as wide as mans need (vv. 22, 23); (iii) it is made possible by the propitiatory Sacrifice of Christ (vv. 24, 25); which Sacrifice at once explains the lenient treatment by God of past sin and gives the most decisive expression to His righteousness (vv. 25, 26).
21It is precisely such a method which is offered in Christianity. We have seen what is the state of the world without it. But now, since the coming of Christ, the righteousness of God has asserted itself in visible concrete form, but so as to furnish at the same time a means of acquiring righteousness to man-and that in complete independence of law, though the Sacred Books which contain the Law and the writings of the Prophets bear witness to it. 22This new method of acquiring righteousness does not turn upon works but on faith, i. e. on ardent attachment and devotion to Jesus Messiah. And it is therefore no longer confined to any particular people like the Jews, but is thrown open without distinction to all, on the sole condition of believing, whether they be Jews or Gentiles. 23The universal gift corresponds to the universal need. All men alike have sinned; and all alike feel themselves far from the bright effulgence of Gods presence. 24Yet estranged as they are God accepts them as righteous for no merit or service of theirs, by an act of His own free favour, the change in their relation to Him being due to the Great Deliverance wrought at the price of the Death of Christ Jesus. 25When the Messiah suffered upon the Cross it was God Who set Him there as a public spectacle, to be viewed as a Mosaic sacrifice might be viewed by the crowds assembled in the courts of the Temple. The shedding of His Blood was in fact a sacrifice which had the effect of making propitiation or atonement for sin, an effect which man must appropriate through faith. The object of the whole being by this public and decisive act to vindicate the righteousness of God. In previous ages the sins of mankind had been passed over without adequate punishment or atonement: 26but this long forbearance on the part of God had in view throughout that signal exhibition of His Righteousness which He purposed to enact when the hour should come as now it has come, so as to reveal Himself in His double character as at once righteous Himself and pronouncing righteous, or accepting as righteous, the loyal follower of Jesus.
21. : now, under the Christian dispensation. Mey. De W. Oltr. Go. and others contend for the rendering as it is, on the ground that the opposition is between two states, the state under Law and the state without Law. But here the two states or relations correspond to two periods succeeding each other in order of time; so that may well have its first and most obvious meaning, which is confirmed by the parallel passages, Rom 16:25, Rom 16:26 , Eph 2:12, Eph 2:13 , Col 1:26, Col 1:27 , 2Ti 1:9, 2Ti 1:10 , Heb 9:26 . It may be observed (i) that the N. T. writers constantly oppose the pre-Christian and the Christian dispensations to each other as periods (comp. in addition to the passages already enumerated Act 17:30; Gal 3:23, Gal 3:25, Gal 3:4:3, Gal 3:4; Heb 1:1); and (ii) that is constantly used with expressions denoting time (add to passages above Tit 1:3 , 1Pe 1:20 ). The leading English commentators take this view.
An allusion of Tertullians makes it probable that Marcion retained this verse; evidence fails as to the rest of the chapter, and it is probable that he cut out the whole of ch. 4, along with most other references to the history of Abraham (Tert. on Gal 4:21-26, Adv. Marc. v. 4).
: apart from law, independently of it, not as a subordinate system growing out of Law, but as an alternative for Law and destined ultimately to supersede it (Rom 10:4).
: see on ch. 1:17. St. Paul goes on to define his meaning. The righteousness which he has in view is essentially the righteousness of God; though the aspect in which it is regarded is as a condition bestowed upon man, that condition is the direct outcome of the Divine attribute of righteousness, working its way to larger realization amongst men. One step in this realization, the first great objective step, is the Sacrificial Death of Christ for sin (ver. 25); the next step is the subjective apprehension of what is thus done for him by faith on the part of the believer (ver. 22). Under the old system the only way laid down for man to attain to righteousness was by the strict performance of the Mosaic Law; now that heavy obligation is removed and a shorter but at the same time more effective method is substituted, the method of attachment to a Divine Person.
. Contrast the completed in Christ and the continued in the Gospel (ch. 1:16): the verb is regularly used for the Incarnation with its accompaniments and sequents as outstanding facts of history prepared in the secret counsels of God and at the fitting moment manifested to the sight of men; so, of the whole process of the Incarnation, 1Ti 3:16; 2Ti 1:10; 1Pe 1:20; 1Jn 3:5, 1Jn 3:8: of the Atonement, Heb 9:26: of the risen Christ, Mar 16:12, Mar 16:14; Joh 21:14: of the future coming to Judgement, 1Pe 5:4; 1Jn 2:28. The nearest parallels to this verse which speaks of the manifestation of Divine righteousness are 2Ti 1:10, which speaks of a like manifestation of Divine grace, and 1Jn 1:2, which describes the Incarnation as the appearing on earth of the principle of life.
. . .: another instance of the care with which St. Paul insists that the new order of things is in no way contrary to the old, but rather a development which was duly foreseen and provided for: cf. Rom 1:2, Rom 3:31, the whole of ch. 4, 9:25-33; 10:16-21; 11:1-10, 26-29; 15:8-12; 16:26 &c.
22. turns to the particular aspect of the Divine righteousness which the Apostle here wishes to bring out; it is righteousness apprehended by faith in Christ and embracing the body of believers. The particle thus introduces a nearer definition, but in itself only marks the transition in thought which here (as in ch. 9:30; 1Co 2:6; Gal 2:2; Php 2:8) happens to be from the general to the particular.
: gen. of object, faith in Jesus Christ. This is the hitherto almost universally accepted view, which has however been recently challenged in a very carefully worked out argument by Prof. Haussleiter of Greifswald (Der Glaube Jesu Christi u. der christliche Glaube, Leipzig, 1891).
Dr. Haussleiter contends that the gen. is subjective not objective, that like the faith of Abraham in ch. 4:16, it denotes the faith (in God) which Christ Himself maintained even through the ordeal of the Crucifixion, that this faith is here put forward as the central feature of the Atonement, and that it is to be grasped or appropriated by the Christian in a similar manner to that in which he reproduces the faith of Abraham. If this view held good, a number of other passages (notably 1:17) would be affected by it. But, although ably carried out, the interpretation of some of these passages seems to us forced; the theory brings together things, like the here with the in 3:3, which are really disparate; and it has so far, we believe, met with no acceptance.
. B, and apparently Marcion as quoted by Tertullian, drop (so too WH. marg.); A reads .
om. * A B C, 47. 67**, Boh. Aeth. Arm., Clem.-Alex. Orig. Did. Cyr.-Alex. Aug.: ins. D E F G K L &c. alone is found in Jo. Damasc. Vulg. codd., so that would seem to be a conflation, or combination of two readings originally alternatives. If it were the true reading would express destination for all believers, extension to them.
23. . The Apostle is reminded of one of his main positions. The Jew has (in this respect) no real advantage over the Gentile; both alike need a righteousness which is not their own; and to both it is offered on the same terms.
. In English we may translate this have sinned in accordance with the idiom of the language, which prefers to use the perfect where a past fact or series of facts is not separated by a clear interval from the present: see note on 2:12.
: see Monro, Homeric Grammar, 8 (3); mid. voice = feel want. Gif. well compares Mat 19:20 ; (objective, What, as a matter of fact, is wanting to me?) with Luk 15:14 (subjective, the Prodigal begins to feel his destitution).
. There are two wholly distinct uses of this word: (1) = opinion (a use not found in N. T.) and thence in particular favourable opinion, reputation (Rom 2:7, Rom 2:10; Joh 12:43 &c.); (2) by a use which came in with the LXX as translation of Heb. = (i) visible brightness or splendour (Act 22:11; 1Co 15:40 ff.); and hence (ii) the brightness which radiates from the presence of God, the visible glory conceived as resting on Mount Sinai (Exo 24:16), in the pillar of cloud (Exo 16:10), in the tabernacle (Exo 40:34) or temple (1Ki 8:11; 2Ch 5:14), and specially between the cherubim on the lid of the ark (Psa 80:1; Exo 25:22; Rom 9:4 &c.); (iii) this visible splendour symbolized the Divine perfections, the majesty or goodness of God as manifested to men (Lightfoot on Col 1:11; comp. Eph 1:6, Eph 1:12, Eph 1:17; Eph 3:16); (iv) these perfections are in a measure communicated to man through Christ (esp. 2Co 4:6, 2Co 3:18). Both morally and physically a certain transfiguration takes place in the Christian, partially here, completely hereafter (comp. e.g. Rom 8:30 with Rom 5:2 , 8:18 , 2Ti 2:10 ). The Rabbis held that Adam by the Fall lost six things, the glory, life (immortality), his stature (which was above that of his descendants), the fruit of the field, the fruits of trees, and the light (by which the world was created, and which was withdrawn from it and reserved for the righteous in the world to come). It is explained that the glory was a reflection from the Divine glory which before the Fall brightened Adams face (Weber, Altsyn. Theol. p. 214). Clearly St. Paul conceives of this glory as in process of being recovered: the physical sense is also enriched by its extension to attributes that are moral and spiritual.
The meaning of in this connexion is well illustrated by 4 Ezr. 7:42 [ed. Bensly = vi. 14 O. F. Fritzsche, p. 607], where the state of the blessed is described as neque meridiem, neque noctem, neque ante lucem [perh. for antelucium; vid. Bensly ad loc.], neque nitorem, neque claritatem, neque lucem, nisi solummodo splendorem claritatis Altissimi [perh. = ]. In quoting this passage Ambrose has sola Dei fulgebit claritas; Dominus enim erit lux omnium (cf. Rev 21:24). The blessed themselves shine with a brightness which is reflected from the face of God: ibid. vv. 97, 98 [Bensly = 71, 72 O. F. Fritzsche] quomodo incipiet () vultus eorum fulgere sicut sol, et quomodo incipient stellarum adsimilari lumini festinant enim videre vultum [eius] cui serviunt viventes et a quo incipient gloriosi mercedem recipere (cf. Mat 13:43).
24. . The construction and connexion of this word are difficult, and perhaps not to be determined with certainty. (i) Many leading scholars (De W. Mey. Lips. Lid. Win. Gr. xlv. 6 b) make mark a detail in, or assign a proof of, the condition described by . In this case there would be a slight stress on : men are far from Gods glory, because the state of righteousness has to be given them; they do nothing for it. But this is rather far-fetched. No such proof or further description of is needed. It had already been proved by the actual condition of Jews as well as Gentiles; and to prove it by the gratuitousness of the justification would be an inversion of the logical order. (ii) is taken as = (Fri.) or = (Tholuck). But this is dubious Greek. (iii) is not taken with what precedes, but is made to begin a new clause. In that case there is an anacoluthon, and we must supply some such phrase as ; (Oltr.). But that would be harsh, and a connecting particle seems wanted. (iv) Easier and more natural than any of these expedients seems to be, with Va. and Ewald, to make practically a parenthesis, and to take the nom. as suggested by in ver. 23, but in sense referring rather to in ver. 22. No doubt such a construction would be irregular, but it may be questioned whether it is too irregular for St. Paul. The Apostle frequently gives a new turn to a sentence under the influence of some expression which is really subordinate to the main idea. Perhaps as near a parallel as any would be 2Co 8:18, 2Co 8:19 , (as if had preceded).
. Each of these phrases strengthens the other in a very emphatic way, the position of further laying stress on the fact that this manifestation of free favour on the part of God is unprompted by any other external cause than the one which is mentioned ( ).
. It is contended, esp. by Oltramare, (i) that and in classical Greek = not to pay a ransom, but to take a ransom, to put to ransom, or release on ransom, as a conqueror releases his prisoners (the only example given of is Plut. Pomp. 24 , where the word has this sense of putting to ransom); (ii) that in LXX is frequently used of the Deliverance from Egypt, the Exodus, in which there is no question of ransom (so Exo 6:6, Exo 6:15:13; Deu 7:8; Deu 9:26; Deu 13:5, &c.: cf. also Exo 21:8, of the release of a slave by her master). The subst. occurs only in one place, Dan 4:30 [29 or 32], LXX of Nebuchadnezzar`s recovery from his madness. Hence it is inferred (cf. also Westcott, p. 296, and Ritschl, Rechtfert. u. Vershn. ii. 220 ff.) that here and in similar passages denotes deliverance simply without any idea of ransom. There is no doubt that this part of the metaphor might be dropped. But in view of the clear resolution of the expression in Mar 10:45 (Mat 20:28) , and in 1Ti 2:6 , and in view also of the many passages in which Christians are said to be bought, or bought with a price (1Co 6:20, 1Co 6:7:23; Gal 3:13; 2Pe 2:1; Rev 5:9: cf. Act 20:28; 1Pe 1:18, 1Pe 1:19), we can hardly resist the conclusion that the idea of the retains its full force, that it is identical with the , and that both are ways of describing the Death of Christ. The emphasis is on the cost of mans redemption. We need not press the metaphor yet a step further by asking (as the ancients did) to whom the ransom or price was paid. It was required by that ultimate necessity which has made the whole course of things what it has been; but this necessity is far beyond our powers to grasp or gauge.
. We owe to Haussleiter (Der Glaube Jesu Christi, p. 116) the interesting observation that wherever the phrase or occurs there is no single instance of the variants or . This is significant, because in other combinations the variants are frequent. It is also what we should expect, because and . always relate to the glorified Christ, not to the historic Jesus.
25. may = either (i) whom God proposed to Himself, purposed, designed (Orig. Pesh.); or (ii) whom God set forth publicly (proposuit Vulg.). Both meanings would be in full accordance with the teaching of St. Paul both elsewhere and in this Epistle. For (i) we may compare the idea of the Divine in ch. 9:11(8:28); Eph 3:11 (1:11); 2Ti 1:9; also 1Pe 1:20. For (ii) compare esp. Gal 3:1 . But when we turn to the immediate context we find it so full of terms denoting publicity (, , ) that the latter sense seems preferable. The Death of Christ is not only a manifestation of the righteousness of God, but a visible manifestation and one to which appeal can be made.
: usually subst. meaning strictly place or vehicle of propitiation, but originally neut. of adj. ( Exo 25:16 [17], where however Gif. takes the two words as substantives in apposition). In LXX of the Pentateuch, as in Heb 9:5, the word constantly stands for the lid of the ark, or mercy-seat, so called from the fact of its being sprinkled with the blood of the sacrifices on the Day of Atonement. A number of the best authorities (esp. Gif. Va. Lid. Ritschl, Rechtfert. u. Versohn. ii.169 ff. Exo_2) take the word here in this sense, arguing (i) that it suits the emphatic in ; (ii) that through LXX it would be by far the most familiar usage; (iii) that the Greek commentators (as Gif. has shown in detail) unanimously give it this sense; (iv) that the idea is specially appropriate inasmuch as on Christ rests the fulness of the Divine glory, the true Shekinah, and it is natural to connect with His Death the culminating rite in the culminating service of Atonement. But, on the other hand, there is great harshness, not to say confusion, in making Christ at once priest and victim and place of sprinkling. Origen it is true does not shrink from this; he says expressly invenies igitur esse ipsum et propitiatorium et pontificem et hostiam quae offertur pro populo (in Rom. iii. 8, p. 3 Lomm.). But although there is a partial analogy for this in Heb 9:11-14, 23-10:22, where Christ is both priest and victim, it is straining the image yet further to identify Him with the . The Christian , or place of sprinkling, in the literal sense, is rather the Cross. It is also something of a point (if we are right in giving the sense of publicity to ) that the sprinkling of the mercy-seat was just the one rite which was withdrawn from the sight of the people. Another way of taking is to supply with it on the analogy of , , . This too is strongly supported (esp. by the leading German commentators, De W. Fri. Mey. Lips.). But there seems to be no clear instance of used in this sense. Neither is there satisfactory proof that . (subst.) = in a general sense instrument or means of propitiation. It appears therefore simplest to take it as adj. accus. masc. added as predicate to . There is evidence that the word was current as an adj. at this date ( Joseph. Antt. XVI. vii. 1; 4 Macc. 17:22* , and other exx.). The objection that the adj. is not applied properly to persons counts for very little, because of the extreme rarity of the sacrifice of a person. Here however it is just this personal element which is most important. It agrees with the context that the term chosen should be rather one which generalizes the character of propitiatory sacrifice than one which exactly reproduces a particular feature of such sacrifice.
The Latin versions do not help us: they give all three renderings, propitiatorium, propitiatorem, and propitiationem. Syr. is also ambiguous. The Coptic clearly favours the masc. rendering adopted above.
It may be of some interest to compare the Jewish teaching on the subject of Atonement. When a man thinks, I will just go on sinning and repent later, no help is given him from above to make him repent. He who thinks, I will but just sin and the Day of Atonement will bring me forgiveness, such an one gets no forgiveness through the Day of Atonement. Offences of man against God the Day of Atonement can atone; offences of man against his fellow-man the Day of Atonement cannot atone until he has given satisfaction to his fellow-man; and more to the same effect (Mishnah, Tract. Joma, Viii. 9, ap. Winter u. Wnsche, Jd. Lit. p. 98). We get a more advanced system of casuistry in Tosephta, Tract. Joma, v: R. Ismael said, Atonement is of four kinds. He who transgresses a positive command and repents is at once forgiven according to the Scripture, Return, ye backsliding children, I will heal your backslidings (Jer 3:23 [22]). He who transgresses a negative command or prohibition and repents has the atonement held in suspense by his repentance, and the Day of Atonement makes it effectual, according to the Scripture, For on this day shall atonement be made for you (Lev 16:30). If a man commits a sin for which is decreed extermination or capital punishment and repents, his repentance and the Day of Atonement together keep the atonement in suspense, and suffering brings it home, according to the Scripture, I will visit their transgression with the rod and their iniquity with stripes (Psa 89:33 [32]). But when a man profanes the Name of God and repents, his repentance has not the power to keep atonement in suspense, and the Day of Atonement has not the power to atone, but repentance and the Day of Atonement atone one third, sufferings on the remaining days of the year atone one third, and the day of death completes the atonement according to the Scripture, Surely this iniquity shall not be expiated by you till you die (Isa 22:14). This teaches that the day of death completes the atonement. Sin-offering and trespass-offering and death and the Day of Atonement all being no atonement without repentance, because it is written in Lev 23:21 (?) Only, i.e. when he turns from his evil way does he obtain atonement, otherwise he obtains no atonement (op. cit. p. 154).
: C* D* F G 67** al., Tisch. WH. text. The art. seems here rather more correct, pointing back as it would do to . . in ver. 22; it is found in B and the mass of later authorities, but there is a strong phalanx on the other side; B is not infallible in such company (cf. 11:6).
: not with (though this would be a quite legitimate combination; see Gif. ad loc.), but with : the shedding and sprinkling of the blood is a principal idea, not secondary.
The significance of the Sacrificial Bloodshedding was twofold. The blood was regarded by the Hebrew as essentially the seat of life (Gen 9:4; Lev 17:11; Deu 12:23). Hence the death of the victim was not only a death but a setting free of life; the application of the blood was an application of life; and the offering of the blood to God was an offering of life. In this lay more especially the virtue of the sacrifice (Westcott, Ep. Jo. p. 34 ff.; p. 293 f.).
For the prominence which is given to the Bloodshedding in connexion with the Death of Christ see the passages collected below.
: denotes the final and remote object, the nearer object. The whole plan of redemption from its first conception in the Divine Mind aimed at the exhibition of Gods Righteousness. And the same exhibition of righteousness was kept in view in a subordinate part of that plan, viz. the forbearance which God displayed through long ages towards sinners. For the punctuation and structure of the sentence see below. For see on ch. 2:15: here too the sense is that of proof by an appeal to fact.
. In what sense can the Death of Christ be said to demonstrate the righteousness of God? It demonstrates it by showing the impossibility of simply passing over sin. It does so by a great and we may say cosmical act, the nature of which we are not able wholly to understand, but which at least presents analogies to the rite of sacrifice, and to that particular form of the rite which had for its object propitiation. The whole Sacrificial system was symbolical; and its wide diffusion showed that it was a mode of religious expression specially appropriate to that particular stage in the worlds development. Was it to lapse entirely with Christianity? The writers of the New Testament practically answer, No. The necessity for it still existed; the great fact of sin and guilt remained; there was still the same bar to the offering of acceptable worship. To meet this fact and to remove this bar, there had been enacted an Event which possessed the significance of sacrifice. And to that event the N. T. writers appealed as satisfying the conditions which the righteousness of God required. See the longer Note on The Death of Christ considered as a Sacrifice below.
: not for the remission, as AV., which gives a somewhat unusual (though, as we shall see on 4:25, not impossible) sense to , and also a wrong sense to , but because of the pretermission, or passing over, of foregone sins. For the difference between and see Trench, Syn. p. 110 ff.: = putting aside, temporary suspension of punishment which may at some later date be inflicted; = putting away, complete and unreserved forgiveness.
It is possible that the thought of this passage may have been suggested by Wisd. 11:23 [24] . There will be found in Trench, op. cit. p. 111, an account of a controversy which arose out of this verse in Holland at the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth centuries.
: as contrasted with , = the single act of sin, = the permanent principle of which such an act is the expression.
: either (i) denotes motive, as Mey., &c. (Grimm, Lex. s. v. , 5 e); or (ii) it is temporal, during the forbearance of God. Of these (i) is preferable, because the whole context deals with the scheme as it lay in the Divine Mind, and the relation of its several parts to each other.
: see on 2:4, and note that is related to as is related to .
26. : to be connected closely with the preceding clause: the stop which separates this verse from the last should be wholly removed, and the pause before somewhat lengthened; we should represent it in English by a dash or semicolon. We may represent the various pauses in the passage in some such way as this: Whom God set forth as propitiatory-through faith-in His own blood-for a display of His righteousness; because of the passing-over of foregone sins in the forbearance of God with a view to the display of His righteousness at the present moment, so that He might be at once righteous (Himself) and declaring righteous him who has for his motive faith in Jesus. Gif. seems to be successful in proving that this is the true construction: (i) otherwise it is difficult to account for the change of the preposition from to ; (ii) the art. is on this view perfectly accounted for, the same display as that just mentioned; (iii) seems to be contrasted with ; (iv) the construction thus most thoroughly agrees with St. Pauls style elsewhere: see Giffords note and compare the passage quoted Eph 3:3-5, also Rom 3:7, Rom 3:8, 2:Rom 3:14-16.
. This is the key-phrase which establishes the connexion between the , and the . It is not that God is righteous and yet declares righteous the believer in Jesus, but that He is righteous and also, we might almost say and therefore, declares righteous the believer. The words indicate no opposition between justice and mercy. Rather that which seems to us and which really is an act of mercy is the direct outcome of the righteousness which is a wider and more adequate name than justice. It is the essential righteousness of God which impels Him to set in motion that sequence of events in the sphere above and in the sphere below which leads to the free forgiveness of the believer and starts him on his way with a clean page to his record.
: him whose ruling motive is faith; contrast ch. 2:8; (as many as depend on works of law) Gal 3:10.
The Death of Christ considered as a Sacrifice
It is impossible to get rid from this passage of the double idea (1) of a sacrifice; (2) of a sacrifice which is propitiatory. In any case the phrase carries with it the idea of sacrificial bloodshedding. And whatever sense we assign to -whether we directly supply , or whether we supply and regard it as equivalent to the mercy-seat, or whether we take it as an adj. in agreement with -the fundamental idea which underlies the word must be that of propitiation. And further, when we ask, Who is propitiated? the answer can only be God. Nor is it possible to separate this propitiation from the Death of the Son.
Quite apart from this passage it is not difficult to prove that these two ideas of sacrifice and propitiation lie at the root of the teaching not only of St. Paul but of the New Testament generally. Before considering their significance it may be well first to summarize this evidence briefly.
(1) As in the passage before us, so elsewhere, the stress which is laid on is directly connected with the idea of sacrifice. We have it in St. Paul, in Rom 5:9; Eph 1:7, Eph 1:2:13; Col 1:20 ( ). We have it for St. Peter in 1Pe 1:2 ( ) and 19 ( ). For St. John we have it in 1Jn 1:7, and in 5:6, 8. It also comes out distinctly in several places in the Apocalypse (1:5, 5:9, 7:14, 12:11, 13:8). It is a leading idea very strongly represented in Ep. to Hebrews (especially in capp. 9, 10, 13). There is also the strongest reason to think that this Apostolic teaching was suggested by words of our Lord Himself, who spoke of His approaching death in terms proper to a sacrifice such as that by which the First Covenant had been inaugurated (comp. 1Co 11:25 with Mat 26:28; Mar 14:24 [perhaps not Luk 22:20]).
Many of these passages besides the mention of bloodshedding and the death of the victim (Apoc. v. 6, 12, xiii. 8 : cf. v. 9) call attention to other details in the act of sacrifice (e.g. the sprinkling of the blood, 1Pe 1:2; Heb 12:24; cf. Heb 9:13, Heb 9:19, Heb 9:21).
We observe also that the Death of Christ is compared not only to one but to several of the leading forms of Levitical sacrifice: to the Passover (Joh 1:29, Joh 1:19:36; 1Co 5:8, and the passages which speak of the lamb in 1 Pet. and Apoc.); to the sacrifices of the Day of Atonement (so apparently in the passage from which we start, Rom 3:25, also in Heb 2:17; Heb 9:12, Heb 9:14, Heb 9:15, and perhaps 1Jn 2:2, 1Jn 2:4:10; 1Pe 2:24); to the ratification of the Covenant (Mat 26:28, &c.; Heb 9:15-22); to the sin-offering (Rom 8:3; Heb 13:11; 1Pe 3:18, and possibly if not under the earlier head, 1Jn 2:2, 1Jn 4:10).
(2) In a number of these passages as well as in others, both from the Epistles of St. Paul and from other Apostolic writings, the Death of Christ is directly connected with the forgiveness of sins (e.g. Mat 26:28; Act 5:30 f., apparently; 1Co 15:3; 2Co 5:21; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14 and 20; Tit 2:14; Heb 1:3, Heb 9:28, Heb 10:12 al; 1Pe 2:24, 1Pe 2:3:18; 1Jn 2:2, 1Jn 2:4:10; Apoc. i. 5). The author of Ep. to Hebrews generalizes from the ritual system of the Old Covenant that sacrificial bloodshedding is necessary in every case, or nearly in every case, to place the worshipper in a condition of fitness to approach the Divine Presence (Heb 9:22 , ). The use of the different words denoting propitiation is all to the same effect ( Rom 3:25; 1Jn 2:2, 1Jn 2:4:10; Heb 2:17).
This strong convergence of Apostolic writings of different and varied character seems to show that the idea of Sacrifice as applied to the Death of Christ cannot be put aside as a merely passing metaphor, but is interwoven with the very weft and warp of primitive Christian thinking, taking its start (if we may trust our traditions) from words of Christ Himself. What it all amounts to is that the religion of the New Testament, like the religion of the Old, has the idea of sacrifice as one of its central conceptions, not however scattered over an elaborate ceremonial system but concentrated in a single many-sided and far-reaching act.
It will be seen that this throws back a light over the Old Testament sacrifices-and indeed not only over them but over the sacrifices of ethnic religion-and shows that they were something more than a system of meaningless butchery, that they had a real spiritual significance, and that they embodied deep principles of religion in forms suited to the apprehension of the age to which they were given and capable of gradual refinement and purification.
In this connexion it may be worth while to quote a striking passage from a writer of great, if intermittent, insight, who approaches the subject from a thoroughly detached and independent stand-point. In his last series of Slade lectures delivered in Oxford (The Art of England, 1884, p. 14 f.), Mr. Ruskin wrote as follows: None of you, who have the least acquaintance with the general tenor of my own teaching, will suspect me of any bias towards the doctrine of vicarious Sacrifice, as it is taught by the modern Evangelical Preacher. But the great mystery of the idea of Sacrifice itself, which has been manifested as one united and solemn instinct by all thoughtful and affectionate races, since the world became peopled, is founded on the secret truth of benevolent energy which all men who have tried to gain it have learned-that you cannot save men from death but by facing it for them, nor from sin but by resisting it for them Some day or other-probably now very soon-too probably by heavy afflictions of the State, we shall be taught that all the true good and glory even of this world-not to speak of any that is to come, must be bought still, as it always has been, with our toil, and with our tears.
After all the writer of this and the Evangelical Preacher whom he repudiates are not so very far apart. It may be hoped that the Preacher too may be willing to purify his own conception and to strip it of some quite unbiblical accretions, and he will then find that the central verity for which he contends is not inadequately stated in the impressive words just quoted.
The idea of Vicarious Suffering is not the whole and not perhaps the culminating point in the conception of Sacrifice, for Dr. Westcott seems to have sufficiently shown that the centre of the symbolism of Sacrifice lies not in the death of the victim but in the offering of its life. This idea of Vicarious Suffering, which is nevertheless in all probability the great difficulty and stumbling-block in the way of the acceptance of Bible teaching on this head, was revealed once and for all time in Isa_53. No one who reads that chapter with attention can fail to see the profound truth which lies behind it-a truth which seems to gather up in one all that is most pathetic in the worlds history, but which when it has done so turns upon it the light of truly prophetic and divine inspiration, gently lifts the veil from the accumulated mass of pain and sorrow, and shows beneath its unspeakable value in the working out of human redemption and regeneration and the sublime consolations by which for those who can enter into them it is accompanied.
I said that this chapter gathers up in one all that is most pathetic in the worlds history. It gathers it up as it were in a single typical Figure. We look at the lineaments of that Figure, and then we transfer our gaze and we recognize them all translated from idea into reality, and embodied in marvellous perfection upon Calvary.
Following the example of St. Paul and St. John and the Epistle to the Hebrews we speak of something in this great Sacrifice, which we call Propitiation. We believe that the Holy Spirit spoke through these writers, and that it was His Will that we should use this word. But it is a word which we must leave it to Him to interpret. We drop our plummet into the depth, but the line attached to it is too short, and it does not touch the bottom. The awful processes of the Divine Mind we cannot fathom. Sufficient for us to know that through the virtue of the One Sacrifice our sacrifices are accepted, that the barrier which Sin places between us and God is removed, and that there is a sprinkling which makes us free to approach the throne of grace.
This, it may still be objected, is but a fiction of mercy. All mercy, all forgiveness, is of the nature of fiction. It consists in treating men better than they deserve. And if we being evil exercise the property of mercy towards each other, and exercise it not rarely out of consideration for the merit of someone else than the offender, shall not our Heavenly Father do the same?
CONSEQUENCES OF THE NEW SYSTEM
3:27-31. Hence it follows (1) that no claim can be made on the ground of human merit, for there is no merit in Faith (vv. 27, 28); (2) that Jew and Gentile are on the same footing, for there is but one God, and Faith is the only means of acceptance with Him (vv. 29, 30).
An objector may say that Law is thus abrogated. On the contrary its deeper principles are fulfilled, as the history of Abraham will show (ver. 31).
27 There are two consequences which I draw, and one that an objector may draw, from this. The first is that such a method of obtaining righteousness leaves no room for human claims or merit. Any such thing is once for all shut out. For the Christian system is not one of works-in which there might have been room for merit-but one of Faith. 28 Thus (, but see Crit. Note) we believe that Faith is the condition on which a man is pronounced righteous, and not a round of acts done in obedience to law.
29 The second consequence [already hinted at in ver. 22] is that Jew and Gentile are on the same footing. If they are not, then God must be God of the Jews in some exclusive sense in which He is not God of the Gentiles. 30 Is that so? Not if I am right in affirming that there is but one God, Who requires but one condition-Faith, on which He is ready to treat as righteous alike the circumcised and the uncircumcised-the circumcised with whom Faith is the moving cause, and the uncircumcised with whom the same Faith is both moving cause and sole condition of their acceptance.
31 The objector asks: Does not such a system throw over Law altogether? Far from it. Law itself (speaking through the Pentateuch) lays down principles (Faith and Promise) which find their true fulfilment in Christianity.
27. : an instance of the summarizing force of the aorist; it is shut out once for all, by one decisive act.
St. Paul has his eye rather upon the decisiveness of the act than upon its continued result. In English it is more natural to us to express decisiveness by laying stress upon the result-is shut out.
: here may be paraphrased system, Law being the typical expression to the ancient mind of a constituted order of things.-Under what kind of system is this result obtained? Under a system the essence of which is Faith.
Similar metaphorical uses of would be ch. 7:21, 23; 8:2; 10:31, on which see the Notes.
28. recapitulates and summarizes what has gone before. The result of the whole matter stated briefly is that God declares righteous, &c. But it must be confessed that gives the better sense. We do not want a summary statement in the middle of an argument which is otherwise coherent. The alternative reading, , helps that coherence. [The Jews] boasting is excluded, because justification turns on nothing which is the peculiar possession of the Jew but on Faith. And so Gentile and Jew are on the same footing, as we might expect they would be, seeing that they have the same God.
B C Dc K L P &c.; Syrr. (Pesh.-Harcl.); Chrys. Theodrt. al.; Weiss RV. WH. marg.: A D* E F G al. plur.; Latt. (Vet.-Vulg.) Boh. Arm.; Orig.-lat. Ambrstr. Aug.; Tisch. WH. text RV. marg. The evidence for is largely Western, but it is combined with an element ( A, Boh.) which in this instance is probably not Western; so that the reading would be carried back beyond the point of divergence of two most ancient lines of text. On the other hand B admits in this Epistle some comparatively late readings (cf. 11:6) and the authorities associated with it are inferior (B C in Epp. is not so strong a combination as B C in Gospp.). We prefer the reading .
: we must hold fast to the rendering is declared righteous, not is made righteous; cf. on 1:17.
: any human being.
29. presents, but only to dismiss, an alternative hypothesis on the assumption of which the Jew might still have had something to boast of. In rejecting this, St. Paul once more emphatically asserts his main position. There is but one law (Faith), and there is but one Judge to administer it. Though faith is spoken of in this abstract way it is of course Christian faith, faith in Christ.
: B al. plur., WH. marg.; perhaps assimilated to .
30. : decisively attested in place of . The old distinction drawn between and was that is used of a condition which is assumed without implying whether it is rightly or wrongly assumed, of a condition which carries with it the assertion of its own reality (Hermann on Viger, p. 831; Bumlein, Griech. Partikeln, p. 64). It is doubtful whether this distinction holds in Classical Greek; it can hardly hold for N.T. But in any case both and lay some stress on the condition, as a condition: cf. Monro, Homeric Grammar, 353, 354 The Particle is evidently a shorter form of the Preposition , which in its adverbial use has the meaning beyond, exceedingly. Accordingly is intensive, denoting that the word to which it is subjoined is true in a high degree, in its fullest sense, &c. is used like to emphasize a particular word or phrase. It does not however intensify the meaning, or insist on the fact as true, but only calls attention to the word or fact. In a Conditional Protasis (with , , , &c.), emphasizes the condition as such: hence if only, always supposing that. On the other hand means supposing ever so much, hence if really (Lat. si quidem).
: denotes source, attendant circumstances. The Jew is justified : the force at work is faith, the channel through which it works is circumcision. The Gentile is justified : no special channel, no special conditions are marked out; faith is the one thing needful, it is itself both law and impulse. = the same faith, the faith just mentioned.
31. : see on ver. 3 above.
. If, as we must needs think, ch. 4 contains the proof of the proposition laid down in this verse, must = ultimately and virtually the Pentateuch. But it = the Pentateuch not as an isolated Book but as the most conspicuous and representative expression of that great system of Law which prevailed everywhere until the coming of Christ.
The Jew looked at the O. T., and he saw there Law, Obedience to Law or Works, Circumcision, Descent from Abraham. St. Paul said, Look again and look deeper, and you will see-not Law but Promise, not works but Faith-of which Circumcision is only the seal, not literal descent from Abraham but spiritual descent. All these things are realized in Christianity.
And then further, whereas Law (all Law and any kind of Law) was only an elaborate machinery for producing right action, there too Christianity stepped in and accomplished, as if with the stroke of a wand, all that the Law strove to do without success (Rom 13:10 compared with Gal 5:6 ).
B Cod. Vaticanus
D Cod. Claromontanus
E Cod. Sangermanensis
G Cod. Boernerianus
pauc. pauci.
plur. plures.
Chrys. Chrysostom.
Orig.-lat. Latin Version of Origen
al. alii, alibi.
WH. Westcott and Hort.
Mey.-W. Meyer-Weisa.
Eus. Eusebius.
Mey. Meyer.
Gif. Gifford.
Lid. Liddon.
Oltr. Oltramare.
Go. Godet.
De W. De Wette.
Lips. Lipsius.
Va. Vaughan.
Lft. Lightfoot.
Cod. Patiriensis
&c. always qualify the word which precedes, not that which follows:
K Cod. Mosquensis
L Cod. Angelicus
Cod. Sinaiticus
A Cod. Alexandrinus
Vulg. Vulgate.
Ell. Ellicott.
Boh. Bohairic.
Tisch. Tischendorf.
RV. Revised Version.
P Cod. Porphyrianus
Syrr. Syriac.
Euthym.-Zig. Euthymius Zigabenus.
Theoph. Theophylact.
Ambrstr. Ambrosiaster.
Win. Winers Grammar.
Cod. Sinaiticus, corrector c
a Cod. Sinaiticus, corrector a
Hieron. Jerome.
Latt. Latin.
C Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus
Fri. Fritzsche (C. F. A.).
Cypr. Cyprian.
AV. Authorized Version.
Tert. Tertullian.
Aeth. Ethiopic.
Arm. Armenian.
Clem.-Alex. Clement of Alexandria.
Orig. Origen.
Cyr.-Alex. Cyril of Alexandria.
Aug. Augustine.
F Cod. Augiensis
codd. codices.
Pesh. Peshitto.
* Some MSS. read here (O. F. Fritzsche ad loc.).
Trench, Trench on Synonyms.
Theodrt. Theodoret.
Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament
God Faithful Though Men Be Faithless
Rom 3:1-8
The Jewish people had a great treasure entrusted to them for the benefit of the whole world. This position as stewards for mankind conferred upon them very special privileges, but also exposed them to searching discipline, if they should prove faithless. Some of these advantages are enumerated in Rom 9:4-5. But our failures cannot cancel Gods faithfulness to His covenant promises, 2Ti 2:13. We may always reckon confidently upon His steadfastness to His engagements, whether to the individual or to the nation. It is wonderful, Rom 3:5, how human sin has been a foil to Gods glory, eliciting qualities in His love which otherwise had been unknown; but this cannot excuse our sinfulness.
If this excuse were admitted, God would clearly have been unjust in punishing sin as He has done; and if that line of argument were maintained, it would be right to do evil, if good were always the outcome. Such an admission would open the door to all kinds of abomination, and the mere suggestion of such a conclusion to this argument ought to silence the objector and cover him with shame.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
In chapter Rom 3:1-20 we have the great indictment, the summing up of all that has gone before. There is no moral distinction between Jew and Gentile. All are bereft of righteousness. All are shut up to judgment, unless God has a righteousness of His own providing for them.
That the Jew has certain advantages over the Gentile is acknowledged as self-evident, and of these the chief is the possession of the Holy Scriptures, the oracles of God. But these very Scriptures only made his guilt the more evident. Even if they did not really have faith in these sacred writings yet their unfaith cannot make void the faithfulness of God. He will fulfil His Word even if it be in the setting aside of the people He chose for Himself. He must be true though all others prove untrue. In judgment He will maintain His righteousness, as David confesses in the 51st Psalm (vers. Psa 51:1-4).
Does mans unrighteousness then but prepare the way for God to display His righteousness, and is it a necessity of the case? If so, sin is a part of the divine plan and man cannot be held accountable. But this the apostle indignantly refutes. God is just. He will judge men for their sins in righteousness. And this could not be if sin were foreordained and pre-determined. If the latter were true man might have just cause to complain: If the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto His glory, why yet am I also judged as a sinner? And in that case what was being slanderously reported by some as the teaching of Paul, Let us do evil that good may come, would be correct. But all who so plead show themselves deficient in moral principle. Their judgment is just.
Then in verses Rom 3:9-20 we have the divine verdict on the entire human race. The Jew is no better than the Gentile. All alike are under-that is, slaves to-sin. And this the Old Testament confirms. Like a masterly lawyer he cites authority after authority to prove his case. The quotations are largely from the Psalms, and one from the prophet Isaiah. (See Psa 14:1-3; Psa 53:1-3; Psa 5:9; Psa 140:3; Psa 10:7; Isa 59:7-8; Psa 36:1.) These are testimonies the Jew could not attempt to refute, coming as they do from his own acknowledged Scriptures. There are fourteen distinct counts in this indictment or summary of evidence.
1-There is none righteous, no, not one. All have failed in something.
2-There is none that understandeth. All have become wilfully ignorant.
3-There is none that seeketh after God. All seek their own.
4-They are all gone out of the way. They have deliberately turned their backs on the truth.
5-They are together become unprofitable. They have dishonored God instead of glorifying Him.
6-There is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their practices are evil. They do not follow after that which is good.
7-Their throat is an open sepulchre, because of the corruption within.
8-With their tongues they have used deceit. Lying and deception are characteristic.
9-The poison of asps is under their lips. It is the poison inserted into the very nature of man by that old serpent the devil and Satan at the very beginning.
10-Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness for out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh.
11-Their feet are swift to shed blood. Hatred produces murder, and, alas, in how many ways it is manifested!
12-Destruction and misery are in their ways, because they have forgotten God the source of life and blessing.
13-The way of peace have they not known, for they have deliberately chosen the ways of death.
14-There is no fear of God before their eyes. Hence there is no wisdom in them.
Can any plead Not guilty to all of these charges? If so, let him speak. But none can honestly do so. And so he concludes, We know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped and all the world become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin (vers. Rom 3:19-20).
It is God saying again, as in the days of Noah, The end of all flesh is come before Me! They that are in the flesh cannot please God. The flesh profiteth nothing. How slow we are to learn this! How hard it is for the natural man to give up all pretension to righteousness and to fall down in the dust of self-judgment and repentance before God, only to find he is then in the very place where grace can meet him!
The law was given to a special people as we have seen. They alone were under the law. That Gentiles were not, we have already been told in chapter Rom 2:12-14. How, then, does the failure of those under the law bring in all the world as guilty before God? An illustration may help. A man has a desert ranch of large extent. He is told it is worthless as pasturage or farming land. He fences off twelve acres; breaks it, harrows it, fertilizes it, sows it, cultivates it, and reaps only sagebrush and cactus! It is no use trying out the rest, for all is of the same character. He says it is all good-for-nothing, so far as agriculture is concerned. Israel was Gods twelve acres. He gave them His law, instructed them, disciplined them, warned them, restrained them, protected them, and sent His Son to them; and Him they rejected and crucified. In this act the Gentiles joined. All are under judgment to God. There is no use of further test. There is nothing in the flesh for God. Man is hopelessly corrupt. He is not only guilty, but is utterly unable to retrieve his condition. The law but accentuates his guilt. It cannot justify. It can only condemn.
How hopeless is the picture! But it is the dark background on which God will display the riches of His grace in Christ Jesus!
Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets
Rom 3:1-2
Preciousness of the Bible.
I. Think of the wonderful providence which has watched over the Bible from the beginning. There is no miracle comparable to that which has preserved to us the Scriptures amid all the convulsions of society, after so many centuries of persecution, neglect, superstition, and ignorance-that we should still possess the writings of Moses in their freshness, what a miracle of providence is that!
II. The Old Testament presupposes the New. Neither would be intelligible without the other. And both alike have the same mysterious texture-call it typical, mystical, spiritual, or what you will-whereby the common events of men’s lives and the ordinary course of human history are found to be expressive of heavenly truths-to be instinct with divinest teaching woven into the very midst of the sacred narrative; from the Alpha to the Omega of it are found the mysteries of redemption, the secret purposes and practices of God. And why is all this but because God Himself is in it, because His Spirit hath inspired it in every part? The Scripture is the very shrine of the Eternal-the Holy of Holies, in which the Shekinah of Glory dwelleth, and where God’s voice is heard speaking to man. It is called the Word of God, less because it is His utterance than because it is Divine as well as human-shares the nature of Him whose name in heaven is even now the Word of God. And need I dwell on the grand mystery of all, the awful circumstance that the gospel not only discourses to us of the Eternal Son come in the flesh, but actually exhibits Him to us? In what relation, then, to the ancient oracles of God is our Saviour Christ found to stand as the constant witness to their infallible truth, their paramount value, their Divine origin? They are for ever on His lips. What wonder if, in reply to the question as to what was the Jews’ advantage, the Apostle answered, “Much every way,” chiefly because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
J. W. Burgon, Ninety-one Short Sermons, No. 3.
References: Rom 3:1, Rom 3:2.-G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines, p. 203; R. W. Church, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxviii., p. 113; Preacher’s Monthly, vol. x., p. 193. Rom 3:4.-H. W. Beecher, Sermons, 3rd series, p. 168. Rom 3:6.-B. Jowett, Church Sermons, vol. ii., p. 273; G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines, p. 312. Rom 3:9.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 93.
Rom 3:9-20
Every Mouth Stopped.
I. Perhaps some readers are aware of a feeling of disappointment at reaching this result. Not that they doubt the native depravity of mankind, or the certainty that all men, left to themselves, will go very far astray from righteousness. But it may be said, ail men were not left to themselves. God interposed with a holy and awful law. He took one race under His own moral education. He taught them carefully the way of duty, and did what was possible to fence them in it and cut off all temptation to wander out of it. Surely the average moral standard was greatly raised within that sheltered Hebrew commonwealth, and many individual Hebrews succeeded in leading very virtuous and devout lives “in all the ordinances of the law blameless”! Does it not sound hard to say that not one of them was good enough to justify his life in the sight of God? Is this not like confessing that the whole Mosaic system of religious training and moral legislation was a failure.
II. To put us in a right attitude for judging of this whole matter, it is of the first consequence to see what the purpose of God was in giving His law at all. You cannot judge whether the Mosaic law was a failure or not until you know what it was intended to accomplish. Now, the express teaching of St. Paul is that God did not expect the Jews to attain such a righteousness as would justify them at the last by their own attempts to keep the Mosaic law. A law is not intended to give life: it is only intended to regulate life. The law was not meant to lead to righteousness, because it could not give spiritual life. The law was meant to fill a far humbler office: it brought us a better knowledge of our sin. Each addition to revealed law widens men’s knowledge of what is sinful, and pushes forward the frontier of the forbidden a little nearer to that ideal line which God’s own nature prescribes: “Through the law cometh the knowledge of sin.”
J. Oswald Dykes, The Gospel according to St. Paul, p. 66.
Reference: Rom 3:10.-J. H. Thom, Laws of Life, p. 1.
Rom 3:20
I. That wrath of God against sin, to which conscience testifies, is itself merely His love, the opposition of His love to that which exalts itself against it. The fire of His love lights and cheers and warms all that abides in His love; but is a consuming fire against all that is out of and contrary to His love. And he who knows not God’s wrath against sin knows not God’s love. He who regards not Christ as the Judge and Avenger does not thoroughly know Him as the Saviour. Man will never be won back to God-rather, man will never be brought up to that highest perfection in which even his fall is an element, without a revelation from God which is not liable, as conscience is, to be corrupted by our tendency to sin. And how shall such a revelation be given-such an incorruptible revelation? We must have it, or we drop lower and lower into perdition the longer the world lasts. God made to man what has scoffingly been called a “book-revelation,” a written record of His will and His acts which might not drift away with the vain imaginations and insecure traditions of men, but might remain, guarded by His providence, through the ages of the world. By the commandments and the other moral parts of the law a fixed and unalterable testimony was borne against sin.
II. But whereunto served this law? It could give us no strength, could implant no new principle in our nature, could effect for us no reconciliation with God. The more definite and precise the law was the more effective would it be for this one end, and this only-to multiply transgressions; that by it might be brought out into light the utter incapacity of man to please God or to rescue himself from the awful consequences of sin. The sense of sin is the first step towards recovery. Sad as it is, low as it sometimes sinks a man in loss of hope, it is the first probing of the wound by the Great Physician of the soul. “When the Spirit is come,” says our Lord, “He shall convict the world of sin.”
H. Alford, Quebec Chapel Sermons, vol. iv., p. 84.
References: Rom 3:21.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 253. Rom 3:21-24.-W. M. Metcalfe, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xi., p. 321.
Rom 3:21-26
Paul’s Evangel.
The history of God’s relations with human sin breaks into two-before Christ, and after Christ. The death of Christ, which marks the point of division, is at the same time the key to explain both.
I. Antecedently to the death of Christ the sins of men were passed over in the forbearance of God. By offering His Son for the expiation of sin, God has cut off from men the temptation to misconstrue His earlier toleration of sins, His forbearance to punish them, or His willingness to forgive them. Then, in the antecedent ages, He did pretermit sin in His forbearance; but it was only because He had purposed in His heart one day to offer for it a satisfaction such as this.
II. The same public satisfaction for sin, made by God in the face of the world, which is adequate to explain His former indulgence to past sin, is adequate to justify Him in forgiving sin now. (1) The propitiation instituted by God in His Son’s sacrificial death having been made amply adequate to vindicate Divine justice, without any further exaction of penalty from sinners, Christ’s death becomes our redemption. (2) Let God justify whom He will on the ground of this redemption by the expiating blood of His Son, such a justifying of the guilty must be entirely a gratuitous act on His part, undeserved, unbought by themselves, a boon of pure and sovereign grace. (3) A way of being justified which is entirely gratuitous, hanging not on man’s desert but on God’s grace, must be impartial and catholic. It is offered on such easy terms, because on no harder terms could helpless and condemned men receive it. Only it lies in the very nature of the case that whosoever refuses to repose his hope of acceptance with God upon the revealed basis of Christ’s atonement, shuts himself out and never can be justified at all, since even God Himself knows or can compass no other method for acquitting a guilty man.
J. Oswald Dykes, The Gospel according to St. Paul, p. 77.
References: Rom 3:21-26.-E. H. Gifford, The Glory of God in Man, p. 30; Homiletic Magazine, vol. vii., p. 15.
Rom 3:22
Paul here, in his grand way, triumphs and rises above all these small differences between man and man, more pure or less pure, Jew or Gentile, wise or foolish, and avers that in regard of the deepest and most important things “there is no difference.” And so his gospel is a gospel for the world, because it deals with all men on the same level.
I. There is no difference between men in the fact of sin. The gospel does not assert that there is no difference in the degrees of sin. At the same time, do not let us forget that if you take the two extremes, and suppose it possible that there is a best man in all the world and a worst man in all the world, the difference between these two is not perhaps so great as at first sight it looks. For we have to remember that motives make actions, and that you cannot judge of these by considering those, that “as a man thinketh in his heart,” and not as a man does with his hands, so is he. “All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”
II. There is no difference in the fact of God’s love to us. God does not love men because of what they are, therefore He does not cease to love them because of what they are. His love to the sons of men is not drawn out by their goodness, their morality, their obedience; but it wells up from the depths of His own heart. A man can as soon pass out of the atmosphere in which he breathes as he can pass out of the love of God. “there is no difference” in the fact that all men, unthankful and evil as they are, are grasped and held in the love of God.
III. There is no difference in the purpose and power of Christ’s Cross for us all. “He died for all.” The area over which the purpose and power of Christ’s death extends is precisely conterminous with the area over which the power of sin extends. The power of Christ’s sacrifice makes possible the forgiveness of all the sins of all the world, past, present, and to come. The worth of that sacrifice, which was made by the willing surrender of the Incarnate Son of God to the death of the Cross, is sufficient for the ransom price for all the sins of all men.
IV. There is no difference in the way which we must take for salvation. The only thing that unites men to Jesus Christ is faith. You must trust Him, you must trust the power of His sacrifice, you must trust the might of His living love. Let there be no difference in our faith, or there will be a difference, deep as the difference between them that believe and them that believe not, which will darken and widen into the difference between them that are saved and them that perish.
A. Maclaren, Christian Commonwealth, May 21st, 1885.
References: Rom 3:22.-E. H. Gifford, The Glory of God, p. 1; G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines, p. 373. Rom 3:22-26.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iii., p. 83. Rom 3:23.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 98; J. Natt, Posthumous Sermons, p. 63; G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines, p. 23; Church of England Pulpit, vol. xvii., p. 229; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iv., p. 84; Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxv., p. 184; vol. xxxi., p. 147. Rom 3:23.-J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 9th series, p. 160. Rom 3:24.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. iii., No. 126. Rom 3:24, Rom 3:25.-Ibid., vol. vii., No. 373. Rom 3:24-28.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iii., p. 282. Rom 3:26.-Ibid., vol. i., p. 165; Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. v., No. 255; Ibid., Morning by Morning, p. 269. Rom 3:27.-Ibid., Sermons, vol. viii., No. 429.
Rom 3:28
I. What was the point which lay at the root of St. Paul’s whole argument? It was this: whether obedience to the ordinances of the Jewish law could be deemed necessary to salvation, whether it should be required of Gentile converts, whether there were anything in it which was to be held in conjunction with faith in Christ, or whether it were all done away by Christ, and declared by His Cross and Passion to be incapable of making a sinner righteous before God. This question has now for us faded in the dimness of distance; rejoicing as we do in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, we can perhaps hardly understand that such a question should be argued, much less that it should form the grand point of discussion in any age of the Church. Yet so it was in apostolic times. A very little consideration shows us why it was so, and why it was necessary for the due establishment of the Church that the question should be set at rest at once and for ever. To do this was one of the great tasks entrusted to St. Paul; himself a Jew, a Hebrew of the Hebrews, as touching the law a Pharisee, he nevertheless, by the inspiration of God’s Holy Spirit, saw with a keenness of view, which seems to have been vouchsafed to no other apostle, the error and danger of allowing any word of the law, be it what it might, to be regarded as in any way co-operating with the Lord Jesus Christ for the justification of man. It is in connection with such a view of the subject that St. Paul uses the words of the text.
II. Doubtless we must all strive with our hearts and souls to keep God’s law; but the real question is, in what light we are to regard all works of righteousness, all obedience to God’s law, all efforts to do good, all submission of our will to His, with reference to the pardon of our sins and our entrance into eternal life? And the answer is, that we do wrong if we allow ourselves to consider for a moment how much obedience, how much doing of good, how complete an abnegation of self, will entitle us to God’s favour. No amount will do this. It is only when a man realises his position as redeemed freely by the blood of Jesus Christ, as adopted into God’s family for no merit of his own, that he can serve God with perfect freedom, and consider all that he can do as nothing in comparison with what has been done by God’s grace for him, and return love for love, and cry out in the spirit of adoption, “Abba, Father.”
Bishop Harvey Goodwin, Parish Sermons, 5th series, p. 320.
References: Rom 3:28.-G. Salmon, Sermons in Trinity College, Dublin, pp. 206, 224; S. Leathes, Preacher’s Lantern, vol. iv., p. 415; S. Martin, Sermons, p. 57.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
CHAPTER 3:1-20
1. Objections and Their Answers. (Rom 3:1-8.)
2. The Whole World Under Sin. (Rom 3:9-20.)
Rom 3:1-8
A number of objections are next raised and answered. What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Such would be the natural question of the Jew after reading the argument that the Jew is on the same level with the Gentile. This objection is stated here for the first time. It is important, for the Jews are Gods chosen people and as the Apostle states later, to them belongs 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). If God puts Jews and Gentiles upon the same footing, what then becomes of all these peculiar blessings promised to the Jews? And in chapter 11 the question comes up again. I say then hath God cast away His people? What superiority then hath the Jew This question of a supposed objection is at once answered. The advantage of the Jew is much every way. The chief advantage is stated unto them were committed the oracles of God. They possessed what the Gentiles did not have, the Holy Scriptures, the Word of God. What we call now the Old Testament is therefore the Word of God, in which God spoke to His covenant people. And in these oracles of God are found the great promises for that race, which await their glorious fulfillment in the day of their national restoration.
Another objection comes next. And this is also met and answered (Rom 3:3-4). All did not believe, but that does not make the faithfulness of God void for those who do believe. God does not fail those who put their trust in Him, because others did not believe. Part of the answer is from Davids penitential Psalm (Psa 51:4). David justified God, declared that He was true and then condemned himself. In the day of judgment it will be found that God is true and every man a liar. But this second objection leads to still another one, which is also answered by the Apostle (Rom 3:5-6). But if our unrighteousness commend Gods righteousness, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who inflicteth wrath? If that were true, that He needs our sins for the praise of His righteousness then how shall God judge the world? But more than that. They had accused the Apostle and others of saying, Let us do evil, that good may come. If it were true that our unrighteousness commends Gods righteousness, then this slanderous statement would be perfectly right. For if our sins help to glorify God, why should we be judged for them? But the Apostle brands it as utterly false. For those who sin on such a principle awaits a damnation (judgment) which is just.
Rom 3:9-20
We have seen that the previous verses considered possible objections to the arguments of the preceding chapter. Rom 3:1-8 have therefore a parenthetical character. And now we come to the summary. Gentiles and Jews were proved to be absolutely unrighteous and therefore guilty and lost. The judgment wrath of a righteous God is upon them who had no law and upon them who possessed the law. The verdict of the Oracles of God is given. The following Scripture passages are quoted to confirm all that has been said: Psa 14:1-3; Psa 53:1-3; Psa 5:9; Psa 140:3; Psa 10:7; Isa 59:7-8; Psa 36:1. The whole human race is proved to be negatively and positively bad; nothing good and everything bad is in man. Read carefully these positive statements. We need to be reminded of them in a day when almost universally the truth of mans lost condition is disbelieved, and when religious teachers constantly speak of a better self, a divine spark, the germ of good; when thousands follow the unscriptural teaching of a Fatherhood of God apart from true and saving faith in the Lord Jesus. Therefore read what God saith about the condition of his fallen creature. There is none righteous, no, not one;–There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God;–there is none that doeth good, no, not one. How positive are these statements. And it is blessed to read in the Scriptures that God knows all the depths of sin into which we have been plunged. God knows all, and here He shows us the true picture of ourselves. Wherefore by works of law shall no flesh be justified before Him; for through law is knowledge of sin. Men try to do something to meet Gods requirements, but they cannot do that. All human efforts in doing good works are futile. That which is born of the flesh is flesh. And they that are in the flesh cannot please God. By deeds of law, all kinds of religious observances and good works, no flesh shall be justified before Him. Thus ends the revelation concerning man guilty and lost. The whole world is proved under sin. Man cannot save himself. If there is salvation, it must come from God. Upon this dark, dreary background a righteous God now flashes forth the wonderful story of redeeming love.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
in the spirit
(See Scofield “Rom 7:6”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
advantage: Rom 2:25-29, Gen 25:32, Ecc 6:8, Ecc 6:11, Isa 1:11-15, Mal 3:14, 1Co 15:32, Heb 13:9
Reciprocal: Gen 17:10 – Every 2Sa 7:23 – what one Psa 76:1 – In Judah Psa 147:20 – not dealt so Son 8:8 – she hath Isa 1:2 – I have Isa 40:8 – the word Isa 40:21 – General Hos 8:12 – written Mar 12:1 – and set Luk 7:9 – not in Joh 6:63 – the flesh Joh 18:35 – Amos I Rom 2:14 – which Rom 6:2 – God Rom 9:14 – shall Gal 3:19 – then
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
OUR DEBT TO THE JEWS
What advantage then hath the Jew? oracles of God.
Rom 3:1-2
I. The advantage here noticed puts us in mind of our indebtedness to the Jew, more especially in regard to the Holy Scriptures.
II. This advantage reminds us that Divine favour and high privilege may be misused, neglected, and turned into ground of accusation.
III. The blindness of the Jew to the claims of Jesus Christ is a thing so terrible, in view of all the circumstances, that for very pity it should open hearts towards them. Shall we profit so greatly by them and yet be content to see them live and die unenlightened?
Illustration
Mr. T. E. Zerbib, of Mogador, Morocco, mentions the following sad confession of the darkness of modern Judaism: After a conversation with several Jews on the prophecies, one of them said, We laid aside the Word of God a long time ago, and our religion consists in celebrating the feasts only and wearing our black caps! We have no longer the religion of the fear of God and of justice. We walk in darkness, and dare not take away the veil from our eyes and from our hearts, for fear of recognising that Jesus of Nazareth is truly the Messiah, and yet there is none other. And yet, I replied, you will not decide to follow the gospel! I cannot teach it in our synagogues, answered the Jew, but I speak about it to every one I know, and, as you know, I am very much persecuted for doing so.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
PAUL KNEW WELL that all this would be very objectionable in Jewish ears, and that they would indignantly charge him with belittling and setting aside all that God had done in calling Israel out of Egypt to be His people. Hence the questions that he raises in the first verse of chapter 3. His answer is that it was indeed profitable to be a Jew, and chiefly in this, that he had the Word of God.
Let us at this point make a present-day application. The position of privilege held in the former day by the Jew is now held by Christendom. There is an undoubted advantage in being born and bred in a Christian land, yet at the same time tremendous responsibilities. Also, it is sadly true that the awful sins of Christendom only provoke the heathen to blaspheme. The unconverted professor of the Christian religion will be judged according to the high standard he has professed, and hence merit severer judgment.
The oracles of God today cover not only the Old but also the New Testament-not only the word of His law but also the word of His grace. But let us specially underline that word, committed. Of old the oracles of God were committed to the Jews; today they are to the Church. That is the true position. The Church is not the producer of the oracles, nor is she, as so many falsely assert, the only authorized teacher of them; she is simply the custodian of them. They are committed to her that by them the Spirit may be her Teacher.
In the beginning of our third chapter only the Jew and the law are in question. The Apostle knew well the quibbles raised by Jewish minds. He was aware too of slanderous reports that they circulated as concerning his teaching. Hence what he says in verses Rom 3:3-8. He makes it perfectly plain that no amount of human unbelief can nullify or alter what God has said. The faith of God is, of course, all that which God has revealed, in order that men may receive it in faith.
Again, God is so supremely above mans evil and unbelief that He knows how to turn it ultimately into a kind of dark background whereon to display the brightness of His righteousness and truth. Does this in any way compromise Him, or make it wrong for Him to judge the sinner? It does not: nor does it furnish any kind of excuse for those who would like to seize upon it as a reason for further wrong-doing, saying, If my evil can thus be made to serve Gods glory, I will proceed to accomplish more evil. The judgment of such will be certain and just.
What then is the position? Let us be sure that we understand it. Verse Rom 3:9 raises this question. The position is, that though the Jew had certain great advantages as compared with the Gentile, he was no better than the Gentile. The Apostle had proved this before, especially in chapter 2. Both Jew and Gentile are under sin. He was not however, in the case of the Jew, going to rest content with proving it by reasoning. He proceeds to quote directly against him his own Scriptures.
Verse Rom 3:10 begins, As it is written. And there follows down to the end of verse Rom 3:18 a series of quotations from the Psalms and one from Isaiah, six in all. They describe in full the real state into which mankind is sunk.
The first quotation (vv. Rom 3:10-12) is a passage found twice in the Psalms (Psa 14:1-7 and Psa 53:1-6). Its repetition would seem to indicate that its statements are most important and on no account to be missed by us; though they are of such a nature that we should be very glad to miss them, if we had our way. This quotation contains six statements of a general and comprehensive and sweeping nature. Four are negative statements and two positive. Four times we find none, and twice all, though the second time it is implied and not expressed. Let us face the sweeping indictment.
The first count is this: None righteous-not even one. This embraces us all. The statement is like a net, so capricious that it takes all in, so sound that not the smallest fish can find a rent that permits it to escape. No one of us is right in our relations with God.
Someone who is contentious might reply, That seems exaggerated. But even if true, man is an intelligent creature. He only has to be told, for him to put things right. But the second count is to the effect that nobody does understand their state of unrighteousness. They are incapable of fathoming their plight, or even a fraction of it. This considerably aggravates the position.
Oh, well, says the contentious one, if mans understanding is astray, there are his instincts and feelings. These are all right, and if followed will surely lead him after God. But count No. 3 confronts us-there is no one who seeks after God. Is that really so? It is indeed. Then what does man seek after? We all know, do we not? He seeks after self-pleasing, self-advancement, self-glory. Consequently he seeks money, pleasure, sin. What he seeks when the power of God has touched his heart is another matter. The point here is what he seeks according to his fallen nature, and apart from the grace of God.
Mans state is wrong. His mind is wrong. His heart is wrong. This third count clinches the matter and seals his condemnation. It shows there is no point of recovery in himself.
Out of this flow the three counts of verse Rom 3:12. All are astray. All, even if massed together, are unprofitable; just as you may add noughts to noughts in massed thousands, and it all amounts to nothing. And lastly, all mans works, as well as his ways are wrong. He may do a thousand things which upon the surface look very fair. Yet are they all wrong because done from a totally wrong motive. No work is right but that which springs from the seeking of God and his interests. And that is precisely what man never seeks, but rather his own interests, as we have just seen.
It is very striking how the words, No, not one, occur at the end of the first and last of the counts. They have been translated, Not even one… not so much as one, which is perhaps even more striking. Well then, may they strike home to all our hearts. We are not going to suppose that the Christian reader wishes to quarrel with the indictment-we should at once doubt his Christianity if he did-but we are sure that many of us have accepted and read these words without at all fully realizing the state of the ruin, irremediable apart from the grace of God, which they reveal. It is most important that we should realize it, for except we correctly diagnose the disease we shall never properly appreciate the remedy.
The objector however may still have something to say. He may complain that all these six statements are of a general nature, and he may remind us that when lawyers have a weak case they indulge in much talk of a general sort so as to avoid being compelled to descend to particulars. If he speaks thus, he is immediately confronted by verses Rom 3:13-18, in which particulars are given. These particulars relate to six members of mans body: his throat, tongue, lips, mouth, feet and eyes. It is in the body that man sins, and deeds done in the body are to be judged in the day that is before us all. Notice that of the members mentioned no less than four have to do with what we say. One refers to what we do, and one to what we think; for the eye is the window of the mind.
What an awful story it is! And what language! Take time that it may soak in. An open sepulchre for instance! How terribly expressive! Is mans throat like the entrance to a cave filled with dead mens bones and all uncleanness and stench? It is. And not only is there uncleanness and stench but deceit and poison, cursing and bitterness. His ways are violence, destruction, misery. No peace is there, whilst God and His fear have no place in his mind.
Now all this was specially and pointedly said to the Jew. Paul reminds them of this in verse 19. They were the people under the law to whom the law primarily addressed itself. They might wish to brush it all aside, and make believe that it only applied to the Gentile. This was inadmissible. The laws of England address themselves to the English; the laws of China to the Chinese; the law of Moses to the Jew. Their own Scriptures condemn them, shutting their mouths and bringing in against them the sentence-Guilty before God.
This completes the story. Barbarian and Greek had before been proved guilty and without excuse. All the world is guilty before God. Moreover there is nothing in the law to extricate us from our guilt and judgment. Its part the rather is to bring home to us the knowledge of our sin. It has done this most effectually in the verses we have just considered.
Where then is hope to be found? Only in the Gospel. The unfolding of the Gospel starts with verse Rom 3:21, the opening words of which are, But now… In contrast with this story of unrelieved darkness there has now come to light another story. Blessed be God, ten thousand times ten thousand, that there is another story to tell. And here we have it told in an order that is divine, and in words that are divinely chosen. That word NOW is emphatic. We shall meet with it again several times in reference to various details of the Gospel message. Anticipate what is to come to the extent of reading the following verses, and observing its use:-Rom 5:9; Rom 5:11 (marginal reading); Rom 6:22; Rom 7:6; Rom 8:1.
The first word in connection with the Gospel is, the righteousness of God, and not as we might have expected, the love of God. The fact is that mans sin is a direct challenge to Gods righteousness, and hence that righteousness must in the first place be established. The whole Gospel scheme is founded in divine righteousness. What news can be better than that? It guarantees the stability and endurance of all that follows.
The Gospel then is, in the first place, the manifestation of the righteousness of God, altogether apart from the law, though both law and prophets had borne witness to it. That righteousness has been manifested, not in rightful legislation, nor in the execution of perfectly just retribution upon the transgressors, but in Christ and in the redemption that is in Him. In the death of Christ there was a complete and final settlement, upon a righteous basis, of every question which mans sin had raised. This is stated in verse 25. Propitiation has been made. That is, full satisfaction has been rendered to the righteousness of God; and that not only in regard to the sins of those who are believers in this Gospel age, but also in regard to those of all previous ages. The sins that are past, are the sins of those who lived before Christ came-past, that is, from the standpoint of the cross of Christ, and not from the standpoint of your conversion, or my conversion, or anybodys conversion.
That righteousness of God, which has been manifested and established in the death of Christ, is unto all, but is only upon all them that believe. Its bearing is unto or towards everybody. As far as Gods intention in it is concerned, it is for all. On the other hand only those who actually believe receive the benefit. Then the righteousness of God is upon them in its realized effect, and they stand right with God. God Himself is the Justifier of the one who believes in Jesus, however great his guilt has been, and He is just in justifying him. This is stated in verse 26.
This glorious justification, this complete clearance, is the portion of all who believe in Jesus, whether Jew or Gentile. All have sinned, so that there is no difference as to guilt. In the same way there is no difference in the way of justification. Faith in Christ, and that alone, puts a man right with God. This is stated in verse 30.
This way of blessing, as is evident, shuts out all boasting on the part of men. It is wholly excluded. Here is the reason why proud men hate the idea of the grace of God. We are justified freely by His grace. Grace gave Jesus to die. Grace is the way of Gods acting in justification, and faith is the response upon our part. We are justified by faith apart from the works of the law. This is the conclusion to which we are led by the truth we have been considering.
The last verse of our chapter meets the objection, which might be raised by a zealous Jew, that this Gospel message cannot be true because it falsifies the law, indubitably given of God at an earlier time. No, says Paul, far from making the law null and void, we establish it by putting it in the place God always intended it to occupy.
Never was the law so honoured and established as in the death of Christ. The Gospel honours it by allowing it to do its proper work of bringing in the knowledge of sin. Then the Gospel steps in and does what the law was never intended to do. It brings complete justification to the believer in Jesus.
Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary
3:1
Rom 3:1. Advantage means “preeminence or superiority,” and not some special favor that would give him any more assurance of salvation. After all that Paul had just written about the equality of the Jews and Gentiles as far as it concerned their spiritual worth, they might feel grieved and think that no other kind of superiority was acknowledged for them, hence the question the apostle asks.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Rom 3:1. What then is the advantage, etc. On the connection of thought, see above.
The Jew. Used generically for the Jews.
The profit, or, benefit, of circumcision. This is a specification, which is naturally introduced in view of the previous discussion (chap. Rom 2:25-29).
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
The sense is this: But you of the Jews will object and say, “If outward circumcision avails nothing, but the inward circumcision is all in all; and if the uncircumcised person, keeping the law, is to be reckoned as circumcised, what advantage then hath the Jew above the Gentile, or what profit is there of the circumcision above uncircumcision? He answers it, Rom 3:2 saying, The advantage is much every way; but chiefly because unto them were committed the oracles of God: That is, the holy scriptures contained in the Old Testament, that sacraments and seals of the covenant, the prophecies and promises of the Messiah, and the whole revelation of the word and will of God, were then found with them, and in their hands only.
Hence learn, 1. Great is that people’s privilege and mercy, who enjoy the word of God, the audible word in the holy scriptures, the visible word in the holy sacraments. This enlighteneth the eyes, rejoiceth the heart, quickeneth the soul. This is compared to gold for profit, to honey for sweetness, to milk for nourishing, to food for strengthening.
Oh how many souls are blessing God eternally for the benefit and blessing of divine revelation!
The Jews had this special favour, to them were committed the Oracles of God; that is, the writings of Moses and the prophets.
But we Christians have a privilege beyond them, the doctrine of Jesus delivered to us by evangelists and apostles; not like the killing letter of the law, but a gospel, bringing life and immortality to light.
Observe, 2. The title which St. Paul gives to the holy scriptures; he calls them the oracles of God. St. Stephen calls them, the lively oracles, Act 7:38 partly because delivered by a lively voice from God, partly because they should be to us as oracles; that is, consulted with upon all occasions, for resolving all doubts, determining all controversies. Had the church of Rome consulted these oracles more, and councils, &c. less, she had kept the doctrine of faith much freer from corruption than she has done.
Observe lastly, That the original word, here rendered oracles, is the same which profane wretches made use of for the dark and doubtful oracles of the devil: Nevertheless, the Holy Ghost doth not disdain, nor decline, to make use of this word, as he also doth several others, though abused to heathenish superstition; which may serve to rectify their mistake, who scruple to make use of words, much more of some things which have been abused to superstition. Verily, there may be superstition in avoiding superstition; and though we cannot be too circumspect in our words and actions, yet we may be too nice and precise in both.
Yet note, That though the same word, logos, signifies God’s oracles and Satan’s, yet these oracles were not delivered in the same manner: Satan delivered his oracles ambiguously and doubtfully, keeping his dark and blind votaries as much as might be in the dark; what he said might bear several constructions, that so, whatever the event or issue prove to be, he, the father of lies, might have the reputation of speaking truth: But God’s oracles are plain and clear, free from ambiguity and darkness; the scriptures are not dark, though some places are difficult, and that proceeds from the sublimity of the matter, not from the intention of the writer.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Rom 3:1-2. What advantage then hath the Jew? The foregoing reasonings being contrary to the prejudices of the Jews, one of that nation is here introduced objecting, If our being the children of Abraham, members of the church of God, and heirs of the promises, will procure us no favour at the judgment, and if the want of these privileges will not preclude the heathen from salvation; or, If it be so that God looks only at the heart, and does not regard persons for their external privileges, what is the pre-eminence of a Jew above a Gentile, and, (for there are two questions here asked,) what profit is there of circumcision And of the other ritual services which are enjoined in the law? To the first of these questions the apostle answers in this chapter, and to the second in chap. 4., beginning at Rom 3:11. Much every way Or in every respect. The respects in which the Jews were superior to the Gentiles are enumerated Rom 9:4-5, where see the notes. Chiefly, because unto them were committed the oracles of God The Scriptures, in which are contained great and important truths, precepts, and promises. This prerogative Paul here singles out, by which, after removing the objection, he convicts them so much the more. The Greeks used the word , oracles, to denote the responses which their deities, or rather their priests, made to those who consulted them, especially if they were delivered in prose: for, as Beza observes, they gave a different name, , to such responses as were uttered in verse. Here oracles denote the whole of the divine revelations; and, among the rest, the law of Moses, which Stephen calls , living oracles, Act 7:18, because God spake that law in person. All the revelations of God to mankind, from the beginning of the world to his own times, Moses, by the inspiration of God, committed to writing; and what further revelations God was pleased to make to mankind during the subsistence of the Jewish Church, he made by prophets, who recorded them in books; and the whole was intrusted to the Jews, to be kept for their own benefit and for the benefit of the world. Now, this being the chief of all their advantages, as Jews, it alone is mentioned here by the apostle. In like manner, the psalmist has mentioned the word of God as the distinguishing privilege of the Israelites, Psa 147:19, He hath showed his word unto Jacob, &c. He hath not dealt so with any nation. The benefits which the Jews derived from the oracles of God, the apostle had no occasion to explain here, because they were all introduced in the boasting of the Jew, described Rom 2:17-23. Macknight.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Sixth Passage (3:1-8). Jewish Prerogative does not imply Exemption from Judgment.
The order of thought in this piece, one of the most difficult, perhaps, in the Epistle, is as follows:
1. If the Jew is judged absolutely, as the Gentiles are, what advantage has he over them? Answer: The possession of the divine oracles (Rom 3:1-2).
2. But if this possession has not realized the end which it was intended to serve (the faith of Israel in the Messiah), is not the faithfulness of God toward this people annulled? Answer: By no means; it will rather be glorified thereby (Rom 3:3-4).
3. But if God makes use of human sin to glorify Himself, how can He yet make sinners the objects of His wrath? Answer: If the advantage which God derives from the sin of man prevented Him from punishing sinners, the final judgment would become impossible (Rom 3:5-8).
It is obvious that the reasoning is consecutive, even very compact, and that there is no need of expressly introducing an opponent, as many commentators have done. Paul does not here make use of the formula: But some one will say. The objections arise of themselves from the affirmations, and Paul puts them in a manner to his own account.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what is the profit of circumcision? [Paul’s argument was well calculated to astonish the Jews. If some notable Christian should argue conclusively that the Christian and the infidel stood on an equal footing before God, his argument would not be more startling to the church than was that of Paul to the Jews of his day. They naturally asked the two questions found in this first verse, so Paul places the questions before his readers that he may answer them.]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Romans Chapter 3
Having established the great truth that God required real moral goodness, he considers the position of the Jews. Could they not plead special divine favour? Was there no advantage in Judaism? Surely there was, especially in that they possessed the oracles of God. The ways of God were full of blessing in themselves, although that did not change the immutable truths of His nature. And if many among them had been unbelieving, this did not alter the faithfulness of God; and the fact that the unbelief of many did but the more demonstrate the faithfulness of God, who remained the same whatever they might be, took nothing from the claims of righteousness. Unbelievers should be punished according to what they were; it would but magnify the unfailing faithfulness of God, which never failed, however unavailing it might be for the mass of the nation. Otherwise He could judge no one, not even the world (which the Jew was willing to see judged); for the condition of the world also enhanced and put in evidence the faithfulness of God towards His people. If then the Jew had advantages, was he therefore better? In no wise: all were shut up under sin, whether Jew or Gentile, as God had already declared. [10]
The apostle now cites the Old Testament to prove this with regard to the Jews, who did not deny it with regard to the Gentiles which he had already also shewn. The law, says he, belongs to you. You boast that it refers to you exclusively. Be it so: hear then what it says of the people, of yourselves. It speaks to you, as you acknowledge. There is not then one righteous man among you on whom God can look down from heaven. He quotes Psa 14:2, Psa 3:1-8; Isa 59:7, Isa 8:1-22, to set forth the judgment pronounced on them by those oracles of which they boasted. Thus every mouth was shut, and all the world guilty before God. Therefore it is that no flesh can be justified before God by the law; for if the world in the midst of darkness wallowed in sin, by means of the law sin was known.
But now, without law, apart from all law, a righteousness that is of God has been manifested, the law and the prophets bearing witness to it.
Hence then we find not only the condition of the Gentiles and of the Jews set forth, together with the great immutable principles of good and evil, whatever might be the dealings of God, but the effect of the law itself, and that which was introduced by Christianity as regarded righteousness, altogether outside the law, although the law and the prophets bore witness to it. In a word, the eternal truth as to sin and as to the responsibility of man, the effect of the law, the connection of the Old Testament with Christianity, the true character of the latter in that which relates to righteousness (namely, that it is a thing entirely new and independent), the righteousness of God Himself-the whole question between man and God, with regard to sin and righteousness, is settled, as to its foundation, in these few words. The manner of its accomplishment is now to be treated of. [11] It is the righteousness of God by faith in Jesus Christ. Man has not accomplished it, man has not procured it. It is of God, it is His righteousness; by believing in Jesus Christ participation in it is obtained. Had it been a human righteousness, it would have been by the law which is the rule of that righteousness-a law given to the Jews only. But being the righteousness of God Himself, it had reference to all; its range embraced not the one more than the other. It was the righteousness of God unto all. A Jew was not more in relation with the righteousness of God than a Gentile. It was in fact universal in its aspect and in its applicability. A righteousness of God for man, because no man had any for God, it was applied to all those who believe in Jesus. Wherever there was faith, there it was applied. The believer possessed it. It was towards all, and upon all those who believed in Jesus. For there was no difference: all had sinned, and outside the glory of God,[12] deprived of that glory, were justified freely by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. Whether a Jew or a Gentile, it was a sinful man: the righteousness was the righteousness of God; the goodness of God was that which bestowed it, redemption in Christ Jesus the divine means of having part in it. [13] Before the accomplishment of this redemption, God, in view of it, had in patience borne with the faithful, and His righteousness in forgiving them was now clearly manifested. But, further, the righteousness itself was manifested: we come to Christ as a propitiatory that God has set forth before men, and we find on it the blood which gives us free access to God in righteousness,-God whose glory is satisfied in the work that Christ Jesus has accomplished, His blood upon the mercy-seat bearing witness thereof. It is no longer forbearance-righteousness is manifested, so that God is seen to be righteous and just in justifying him who is of faith in Jesus. Where then is boasting? For the Jews boasted much in reference to the Gentiles-self-righteousness always boasts: it is not a law of works that can shut it out. Man justifying himself by his works would have something to boast in. It is this law of faith, this divine principle on which we are placed, which shuts it out: for it is by the work of another, without works of law, that we through grace have part in divine righteousness, having none of our own.
And is God a limited God [14] -the God of the Jews only? No, He is also the God of the Gentiles. And how? In grace: in that it is one God who justifies the Jews (who seek after righteousness) on the principle of faith, and-since justification is on the principle of faith-the believing Gentiles also by faith. Men are justified by faith; the believing Gentile then is justified. With regard to the Jew, it is the principle which is established (for they were seeking the righteousness). With regard to the Gentile, since faith existed in the case supposed, he was justified, for justification was on that principle.
Is it then that faith overturned the authority of law? By no means. It established completely the authority of law; but it made man participate in divine righteousness, while acknowledging his just and total condemnation by the law when under it-a condemnation which made another righteousness necessary, since according to the law man had none-had none of his own. The law demanded righteousness, but it shewed sin was there. If righteousness which it demanded had not been necessary, when it failed to produce it in man, there was no need of another. Now faith affirmed this need and the validity of mans condemnation under law, by making the believer participate in this other righteousness, which is that of God. That which the law demanded it did not give; and even, because it demanded it, man failed to produce it. To have given it would have effaced the obligation. God acts in grace, when the obligation of the law is fully maintained in condemnation. He gives righteousness, because it must be had. He does not efface the obligation of the law, according to which man is totally condemned; [15] but, while recognising and affirming the justice of that condemnation, He glorifies Himself in grace by granting a divine righteousness to man, when he had no human righteousness to present before God in connection with the obligations imposed on him by the law. Nothing ever put divine sanction on the law like the death of Christ, who bore its curse, but did not leave us under it. Faith does not then annul law; it fully establishes its authority. It shews man righteously condemned under it, and maintains the authority of the law in that condemnation, for it holds all who are under it to be under the curse. [16] The reader will remark that what is distinctly set forth to the end of this third chapter is the blood of Christ as applying itself to the sins of the old man, hence making forgiving a righteous thing, and the believer clear from sins, because cleared by Christs blood. This met all the guilt of the old man.
We now enter on another aspect of that which justifies, but still proves sins; not yet, however, putting us in a new place-that of resurrection, in connection with, and consequent on, this.
Footnotes for Romans Chapter 3
10: Note here a very important principle, that there are positive advantages of position, where there is no intrinsic change. Compare chapter 11: 17, and 1Co 10:1-33.
11: Rom 3:21 reverts in fact to Rom 1:17; what comes between is the demonstration of the ground of Rom 1:18, which made the righteousness ofRomans 3:17 imperatively necessary.
12: Remark here how, God being revealed, sin is measured by the glory of God. We are so used to read this that we overlook its force. How strange to say, and come short of the glory of God! Man might say, Why, of course we have; but, morally speaking, this has been revealed, and if one cannot stand before it, according to it, we cannot subsist before God at all. Of course it is not of His essential glory-all creatures are short of that, of course-but of that which was fitting for, according to, could stand in, His presence. If we cannot stand there, fitly walk in the light as God is in the light, we cannot be with God at all. There is no veil now.
13: To shew how complete is this instruction of Pauls, I give here a summary of its elements. In itself it is the righteousness of God, without law, the law and the prophets bearing witness to it: as to its application, the righteousness of God by faith in Christ Jesus unto all, and upon all them that believe. Christ is proposed as the propitiatory by faith in His blood, to shew forth this righteousness by the remission of past sins (of the Abrahams, etc.) according to the forbearance of God; but to shew it forth in the present time, in order that He may be just, and justify those who believe in Jesus.
14: See here again how God is brought out in Himself. Compare Mat 15:19-28.
15: The law is the perfect rule of right and wrong for every child of Adam in itself, though only given to the Jews. But it was not arbitrary. It took up all the relationships in which men stood, gave a perfect rule as to them, and the sanction of Gods authority to them, with a penal sanction. But now we have something much higher, not what man ought to be, but God Himself glorified.
16: Hence those who put Christians under law do not maintain its authority; for they hold them exempt from its curse, though they break it.
Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament
1. Then what is the advantage of the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision? This question is very pertinently asked in view of the preceding deliverances, confirmatory of the non-essentiality of carnal ordinances, church rites, and visible membership to salvation, which is purely and unequivocally the work of God alone wrought in the heart by the Holy Spirit responsive to the free will of every soul who receives Him.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
The first part of this chapter, as far as the twentieth verse, belongs to the two preseding chapters, and confirms, by the words of David, the deplorable state of fallen man.
Rom 3:1-2. What advantage hath the jew? St. Paul was aware of the warm exclamations of his nation against the doctrine of the preseding chapter, that he had superseded the peculiar calling of Abraham, and all the glory it had conferred on the Israelites. The chief advantage was in making them the guardians of the holy scriptures.
To them was committed the eloquence, or the oracles of God. These are called the lively oracles. Act 7:38. In them we have eternal life; yea, the presence of God in his word and ordinances, to comfort and guide his people.
Rom 3:3. What if some did not believe, si non fideles extiterunt quidam, did not continue faithful; for they all believed when passing through the sea, drinking of the rock, and eating the manna. Shall their inconstancy make God inconstant? Shall he revoke his promise to Abraham, and his oath to David? 2Sa 7:25. The promise to Abraham stands, though the rebels died; the oath to David is sure, though the sword departed not from his house. Covenants with men are futile, but with Christ they are sure. On this head, Paul, in a masterly style, quotes Davids own words, which are brilliantly expressed by the LXX: That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and overcome when thou art judged. Psa 51:4. God is true; it is men who fluctuate and lie. St. Paul read the sacred text with enlightened regards; he sees Christ, and glory, and truth, in passages which we pass over as words of ordinary import.
Rom 3:5. But if our unrighteousness commend, or as Tyndal reads, make the righteousness of God more excellent, by introducing plenary pardon to sinners, and all the righteousness promised in the new covenant, is not God unrighteous in being so indulgent to you christians, and so inexorable in condemning us jews, because we do not believe your gospel? God forbid. The rest of the discourse is a reply to this objection, and in fact, a full defence of the doctrines of grace developed in the gospel.
Rom 3:8. Let us do evil, that good may come. To this slander of the jews he replies at large in chap. 6. On Psalms 14. other replies occur.
Rom 3:10. There is none righteous, no, not one. The words that follow in the next eight verses, prove this assertion. What then becomes of the rabbinical boasts of keeping the law? Paul, fighting with Jehovahs sword, always vanquished his foes.
Rom 3:11. There is none that understandeth. Ignorance and contempt of devotion are the general sources of ruin to the human kind. The flood of divine light is poured out to aid us in the conquest of vice.
Rom 3:12. They are all gone out of the way. So it was at Babel, as stated in the note on c Rom 1:23; and by Moses, Genesis 11.; and by Jer 5:1. This general depravity is the harbinger of national ruin.
Rom 3:13. Their throat is an open sepulchre. They drink iniquity like water. Job 15:16. The selfish man swallows down riches unlawfully gained, but God will force him to vomit them up again. Job 20:15. These are the unclean things which enter the heart, and defile the man.
The poison of asps is under their lips. We do not exactly know the species of the asp referred to, but Aristotle pronounces the venom incurable. Cleopatra, queen of Egypt, finding her husband Antony dead, and her kingdom reduced to a Roman province, dispatched the man who watched her, with a letter to Augustus, then in Alexandria, praying that her body might rest with Antony. When the messenger was gone, she put on her best robes, and lay down on the royal bed. In a short time the servants found her dead. And as no wound was found on the body, much excitement was occasioned. Presently they found under her arm a small serpent, of the species of the asp, and which she had for sometime concealed in a basket of fruit. This is the reptile whose virulent poison is often used to designate sin. But if the scripture characters had taken those steps in their troubles, what had become of the glory that followed?
Rom 3:19. What things soever the law saith, it saith to them that are under the law. Therefore it is quite erroneous in thee, oh jewish teacher, to apply the above dark portrait wholly to the gentile world. Most of the words occur in other places, with the fullest sanction of revelation. Psa 40:3. Pro 1:16. Therefore the words wanting in the Hebrew text, may have been collected in the Greek text as paraphrases.
Rom 3:25. Propitiation. signifies mercy-seat. , propitiation. The whole Hebrew ritual prohibited an approach to God without the shedding of blood. The question is, how the Hebrew christians would understand this phrase. Their current language would be, We have boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus. Heb 10:19. It was by the sprinkling of blood, that is, his own blood, by which he sanctifies his people. Heb 12:24; Heb 13:12. The forgiveness of sins is twice connected with redemption in his blood. Eph 1:7. Col 1:14.
Rom 3:29-31. Is he the God of the jews only? If that opinion be true, then he is partial in his administration, and has abandoned his care over the gentiles. Then he is regardless of his covenant and promise to Abraham, that in his Seed, the Messiah, all the families, the nations, of the earth should be blessed. Conformably to that covenant, He who saves the jew by the faith of Abraham, justifies the gentile through the same faith. Say not then that we make void the law through faith, but rather that we perfect the law, which is spiritual, by loving God with an undivided heart.
REFLECTIONS.
The doctrine of justification by faith only, when first preached to the jews and the gentiles, was thought to be quite a new and a daring extent of grace. It required to be clearly stated and well understood, to draw men from their dependence on legal righteousness. Let us pray that the Lord would give us a clear idea of this doctrine, so essential to peace of conscience, which many have long been studying under great mistakes, because of their attachment to their own works.
The first grand point to learn is, that both jew and gentile are all convicted at the divine tribunal; every mouth is stopped, and all the world are found guilty before God. This St. Paul has proved beyond all controversy in this epistle: he has supported his doctrine by the awful portrait in the fourteenth psalm, and made it the foundation of his system.
The second grand proposition in the doctrine of justification is, that men cannot obtain righteousness by legal obedience. The law can do nothing for the guilty, being weak through the flesh: Rom 8:3. The law was originally adapted to the nature of man; and in paradise it was as easy for him to keep it as for the eye to see, or the ear to hear. This law, like its author, is still the same, but man is not the same. The law is still perfect, man is not perfect; the law is still holy, man is not holy. His whole nature is depraved; there is no good in him but what comes from covenanted mercy. Therefore, by the deeds of the law shall no flesh living be justified. This is the axe laid at the root of all human righteousness, and it should warn the sinner to seek the righteousness that cometh from God only. But what is meant by the law? The whole Hebrew code, moral, political, and ceremonial; but sometimes the apostle has the moral law, and sometimes the ceremonial principally in view. Good sense, and a comparison with other texts, will mostly determine that point. The sinner cannot regain original righteousness by any kind of suffering for his sins. His life is forfeited, his nature is impure: what merit then can there be in his sufferings, and what proportion do they bear to the glory of the offended God? The whole ritual code is in its own nature weak, imperfect, and insufficient.
When man has neither help nor hope, and while his mouth is stopped at the great tribunal, God is pleased to set forth his son Jesus Christ to be a propitiation for sin, through faith in his blood. Jesus suffered the just for the unjust, to bring us to God. He bare our sins in his own body on the tree. He was, like the atoning victims, made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. Here christianity has but to display its beauty, and the blood of bulls and goats is coveted no more. The altars are forsaken, mythology is confounded, and the hoary temples fall into decay.
When once the glory of Christ is presented to the mind, it is gained and captivated; and the wounded conscience asks no balm but the merits of the Saviour. This is the righteousness God has provided, which constitutes the sinner righteous in his sight. This is the everlasting righteousness brought in, being witnessed by the law in all its sin-offerings, and by the prophets in all their promises of pardon. Psa 32:1-2. Isa 45:24-25. Mic 7:18. The reader will here most emphatically remark, that the pardon promised in the old testament is everywhere in the new testament ascribed to the blood of Christ. Rom 3:23; Rom 3:26. Eph 1:7. Col 2:14. Thus the church of Christ, and the church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood, are synonimous phrases.
This mode of conferring pardon and privilege on believing sinners, most eminently declares the righteousness of God. No one can say that the altar raised by the gospel is a licentious refuge of guilt, alluring men to destruction by unqualified promises of pardon. God spared not his own Son. He bruised him, and put him to grief. He made his soul an offering for sin. On the high altar of the cross, God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. The sufferings of a world of wicked men could not express the divine abhorrence of guilt so strongly, as is done by the sufferings of the only-begotten of the Father. The gospel therefore can boldly meet every human system, and every objection against its incomparable promises of pardon, by magnifying its author as a just God, and yet the justifier of him that believeth. What regenerate heart can sin against so much love; and what enlightened mind will dare to insult that justice which spared not the beloved of the Father?
This pardon, this redemption, this righteousness, is conferred by faith only, as the sole condition of our justification. The sinner is poor, and can find no price to purchase it; hence the scriptures say, buy wine and milk without money and without price. The sinner is stung with sin, as the Israelites with the serpents; hence it is said, Look unto me and be ye saved, all ye ends of the earth. The general body of our reformers were therefore right in defining faith to be an assent to Gods word, and a reception of Christ in his person and offices. But this is only the first act of faith: the full act of justifying faith is, according to bishop Jewel in the homily, A sure trust and confidence in God, that my sins are forgiven through the merits of Christ. Saurin in his catechism defines it as a power to say that Christ has loved me, and given himself for me.
This is a sort of standard definition of justifying faith, and it has been adopted by the venerable John Wesley. Let every seeker of salvation pray for it, and let him use the weak faith which God has already given him; and as the little child tries to walk till he can go alone, so he shall soon believe with the heart unto righteousness and life. This mode of justifying sinners excludes boasting. The pharisee must kneel at the same bar with the prodigal. Not unto us, oh Lord, not unto us, but to thy name be all the glory.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Rom 3:1-8. Jewish Protests Silenced.
Rom 3:1. What then, it is asked, is the advantage of being a Jew, etc.?
Rom 3:2-4. Much, Paul replies, in every way: to begin with, they were entrusted with the oracles of God (this implies a faith-relationship)a trust not voided by the infidelity of some. Some, for numbers do not count; the heritage of faith is transmitted through the remnant (see Rom 9:6-8, etc.).Nay (to use the language of the Pss.), God will show Himself true, though every man prove false, etc.
Rom 3:5. A further protest: But if our unrighteousness serves to commend Gods righteousness (as you maintain), is God, who inflicts the wrath you speak of, unjust like thatpunishing those who have helped to glorify Him? Paul apologises for repeating the impudent question: I say it as a manas men might and do say.
Rom 3:6 is his reply: Far be the thought; for in that case how will God judge the world?the worlds sin would then go scot-free, for it also illustrates Gods righteousness.
Rom 3:7 f. The objector persists; But if (as you implied) my lie has redounded to Gods glory, why am I too, after that, judged like a common sinner? To the Pharisee, the idea of his being classed with sinners was monstrous (see Luk 7:36-39; Luk 15:1 f., etc.). The question is answered by its ironical continuation: And why not . . . as some people affirm that we (Christians) say, Let us do evil, etc.? This defence is its own condemnation. The Jew makes no reply on the matters of fact alleged in ch. 2; in arrest of judgment he pleads hereditary privilege, and the tending of his misdoing to the greater glory of God.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
What Advantage Has the Jew?
Since God requires subjection of heart from the Jew, and at the same time honors a like subjection of heart in the Gentiles, the question arises, “What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?” What value is there in the very institution of the system of Judaism – instituted, in fact, by God Himself? It is answered plainly, “Much every way: chiefly that unto them were committed the oracles of God.” There is no argument here that this evident fact assures God’s acceptance of them personally, for it does not. But it put them into the unique position of being the only nation to whom the will of God was made known – to whom His counsel and ways were made manifest in former times. Thus He reminds them in Amo 3:2 – “You only have I known of all the families of the earth,” and in Deu 4:7-8, “For what nation is there so great who hath God so nigh unto them, as the Lord our God is in all things that we call upon Him for? And what nation is there so great that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law?”
Thus the Jew had the advantage of circumstances, environment, and training. If he ignored all this, of course, he had only himself to blame for robbing himself of his soul’s only hope. For doubtless some did not believe. But what of this? Shall their unbelief utterly close the door of faith? Can they annul the truth by their refusal of it? Does the faith of God cease to operate because some despise it, or oppose it? “Far be the thought: but let God be true, and every man false.” Man’s reception or rejection of the truth has no bearing whatever upon the truth itself: it remains in its solemn, solitary grandeur, unalterable, invincible, irrevocable; while man’s most violent opposition is merely his self-destruction against an immovable rock. God is true, and it matters not what man opposes His truth – that man is false.
Psa 51:4 is quoted to confirm the necessary truth that every other consideration must give way to the words and judgments of God. He is to be justified without qualification in His sayings: He is to overcome absolutely when He is in judgment. It is the elementary principle of righteousness. Sin itself will be but the occasion of His fully displaying His power over it. He will make the wrath of man to praise Him, and will restrain the remainder of wrath.
But another question arises in the minds of men – that is, if our unrighteousness has resulted in such a manifestation of the glory of God’s righteousness, why then should we be punished? Would He not be heartless in pouring out vengeance on mankind – the Jews in particular? But it is merely a man’s question, and the answer is decisive – “Far be the thought: since how shall God judge the world?” And the Jew would certainly approve of His judging the Gentile world. But the Jew’s case was morally the same – in fact worse, if his privileges are considered. Moreover, the very execution of judgment is a part of the display of God’s glory and righteousness; and cannot be dispensed with.
If the truth of God has been displayed more marvelously on account of my falsehood, why then should I be judged as a sinner?Has not the evil I have done resulted after all in good? Yes, and further, the wilful heart will argue – “Why not do evil that good may come?” Some had even accused Paul of teaching this very thing; but he is most peremptory in his denunciation of those who dare to adopt such principles. Their damnation is just. Theirs is merely the license of rebellion. Dreadful the state of soul which asserts such things; dangerous that which assumes them. Sin, in whatever degree, or whatever circumstances, can have no semblance of excuse or shadow of justification. It is abominable, hateful, abhorrent to God. If indeed God triumphs over it as He does, manifesting His power and bringing forth greater blessing for man than ever before, that is no credit to sin; for neither God’s glory nor man’s blessing are secured on account of sin, but on account of the absolute condemnation of sin. Let us dare to defend sin, and we take our part with it under the condemnation of God, who is greater than sin, and greater than we.
ALL CONCLUDED GUILTY
Verses 9 to 18 give us the summing up of the guilt of all mankind, Jews and Gentiles. The favorable privileges of the Jew made him no better than the Gentile: the proof was conclusive – Jews and Gentiles were all under sin. Nor was this merely the conclusion of the apostle’s argument. The Scriptures had before spoken in such terms, and the summing up of man’s guilt is given in direct quotations from David’s Psalms and Isa 59:1-21.
“There is none righteous, no, not one” – a sweeping condemnation of man’s moral being. “There is none that understandeth”; the very intelligence of all is corrupted by sin. “There is none that seeketh after God”: not even a right object is before them, there is no concern for knowing God. “They are all gone out of the way,” taking a contrary, independent course. “They are together become unprofitable,” – a united degrading of themselves to vain and useless pursuits. “There is none that doeth good, no not one,” – without deeds of manifest goodness.
But there is something that comes out from man’s heart – passing from the throat first, where there is the utter corruption of death – an open sepulchre, revolting to the eyes of the living. Then the tongue, contaminated, becomes the tool of deceit, and the lips, which might have hindered both the throat and tongue, only increase the scourge of evil, adding to it the venomous poison of asps. Little wonder then that the “mouth is full of cursing and bitterness”! Souls may little realize the awful evil of “hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against” God; but “for every idle word that men shall speak they shall give account in the day of judgment.” Here then it is that which comes out of the mouth from the heart, that is first condemned. Verse 14 sums of man’s words; verse 15 his walk; and verse 16 his ways. It is the complete positive condemnation of man; while to add force to this, verses 17 and 18 speak from a negative standpoint, showing that there is absolutely no redeeming feature in the picture. They have not known the way of peace: there is no fear of God before their eyes. This last point is after all really the center and spring of all evil; for little as we may comprehend it, all sin is the result of a negative attitude toward God.
Now, with the guilt of man so fully exposed as he stands before the judgment bar of God, the next question to arise is, What does the law have to say? This is briefly but fully answered in verses 19 and 20: it needs no more, for the answer is evident to an exercised conscience and intelligence. But the principle is first noted that the law addresses itself to “them who are under the law.” Rom 2:14 proves that these are not Gentiles; while Deu 5:1-33; in which chapter the law is summarized, is very plain in its address – “Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day” (v. 1).
Yet Gentiles, while not required, as Israel, to keep this law, could as easily learn one thing from it. That it condemned mankind was plain: no one could dare open his mouth in the face of it. If the Jews were condemned by it so that their mouths were stopped before God’s judgment throne, could the Gentiles fare any better if they attempted to assert their own righteousness?No indeed: their mouths were as effectively stopped: the law made it clear that all the world, being guilty, is under judgment to God. Blessed, though humbling, is the moment in our history when first our mouths are stopped! Only then are we prepared to listen undividedly to God – prepared to receive blessing. So that the very object of the law was to close every mouth and to place all the world under judgment to God. Can it then justify anyone? Impossible! “By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight.” Its very character demands the opposite. “By the law is the knowledge of sin.” It exposes sin: it cannot cover it. It condemns the sinner: it cannot justify him.
The law therefore binds man for judgment: it gives no avenue of escape. So that, if the law binds the action of God, it is all up with man. But thank God, He is greater than law – for law is merely His servant to accomplish the full exposure of sin, in order that He might display His own righteousness apart from law, and transcendently above it – His own ability to fully and gloriously triumph over sin on behalf of those who were in bondage to law on account of sin.
GOD’S RIGHTEOUSNESS REVEALED
“But now”: these words are most blessedly expressive of a marvelous change in the dealings of God with man. It is a change to which God Himself has looked forward with deepest desire since the foundation of the world, for this change brings the manifestation of His own character. Yet, deep as was unquestionably the longing of His heart to make Himself fully known to man, for four thousand years He waited in infinite wisdom and patience, until man for his own sake was exposed as utterly in bondage to sin, without strength, and his very nature a contrast to that of God – an enemy of God by wicked works. Such is the verdict of man’s four thousand years of testing and probation.
“But now.” How full of comfort these words to one who has learned his sinfulness in the sight of God! Yes, much more, how full of relief to the heart of God that the fullness of time has come, that He should send His holy, sinless Son to make Himself known to man! Now He can display His character of perfect, absolute righteousness altogether apart from the law – apart from everything which He Himself had formerly instituted. Matchless glory! Marvelous power! Infinite wisdom! “But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets.”
Not only has God manifested His righteousness unhindered by law, and having a glory far greater than law: but the law itself, and the Old Testament prophets, had borne witness in their time of such a manifestation to come. Blessed testimony to the sovereignty and glory of God! The law itself testified of God’s ability to righteously save the sinner without its help – without reference of any kind to it. Thus the law is in its proper place as merely a servant to God – nothing more.
Verse 21 therefore begins a distinctly new section and subject.
Verse 22 shows this righteousness of God (which could not be manifested in or by law) perfectly manifested in Jesus Christ. But it is important to remark that the point stressed here is that God’s righteousness is manifested on behalf of man – indeed “unto all” – that is, on behalf of all men. God excludes no one from this marvelous blessing. Yet it can have effect only “upon them that believe,” of course. It is available for all, but the hand of faith alone can receive it. That righteousness of God is manifested only in Christ: hence only faith in Christ can secure it for my own soul. It is a righteousness manifested impartially for the sake of all men, but operative only “by faith of Jesus Christ.”
This was an absolute necessity if any man was to receive blessing, for all were in the same case before God – “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” Despite the reality and depth of God’s grace, and His longing desire to forgive – forgiveness is impossible apart from righteousness. God must do right: it is His essential character. He cannot ignore sin. His justice demands satisfaction concerning sin, and cannot be treated with impunity. “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” were the words of Abraham – more as an assertion than a question. And the Psalmist declares, “Righteousness and judgment are the foundation of thy throne” (Psa 89:14 JND).
But the glory of God’s righteousness is this – that while it absolutely condemns sin, it is able to justify the sinner. There is indeed love behind it – infinite, unspeakable, unfathomable love – for it necessitated the giving of His own Son to the awful sufferings of Calvary’s cross, where He Himself endured the full, unalleviated penalty and judgment for sins – “the Just one for the unjust, that He might bring us to God.” The full weight of God’s righteous judgment against sin fell upon Him in those dread hours, so that His soul, moved to its inmost depths, was expressed in words of heart-rending pathos – “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?”
But only thus could the love of God be shown toward us in perfect righteousness. Only the cross can fully display the depths of the love of God, and the perfect purity of His righteousness. And at the very throne of God, grace takes the place of law,-bringing justification in place of condemnation. Simple, concise, plain, yet marvellous beyond thought are the words of verse 24,-“Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” The soul that believes in Jesus Christ is fully and freely cleared of every charge of guilt, by the grace of God, in virtue of the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. And the clearance is a perfectly righteous one, for the guilt has been fully met and atoned for on the cross. Blessed relief for a soul once bowed down with a sense of shame and distress on account of sin, who sees such a refuge in God! There is nothing like trusting entirely to the grace of God and the work of His Son on the cross.
Now God has set Christ in the foreground, for the consideration of men. Set forth as a propitiation,-a mercy-seat to which all men may come if they will, to find perfect justification “through faith in His blood.” Through Christ alone God dispenses mercy,-and He is not hidden so as to be approachable only by a select class. He is the propitiation, “for the whole world” (1Jn 2:2). And every soul who comes to God through Christ, receives forgiveness of sins, justification, a full clearance from guilt and from judgment.
But the Lord Jesus Christ, thus set forth before men, is He by whom God declares His righteousness – a righteousness in respect to the passing by of sins committed even before the cross (as is the force of the last part of verse 25), with which God exercised long forbearance. “The sins that are past,” – or those which were committed aforetime – has reference, doubtless, to the quotations from the Old Testament in verses 10 to 18. For those sins were discovered long before the cross, but God could forbear judgment in view of the cross of Christ, which was already a settled matter in His purposes – which in fact Abraham’s words to Isaac plainly show – “My son, God will provide Himself a lamb for a burnt offering.”
So that the virtue of “the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” reaches both backward to the beginning of the history of fallen man, and forward to the end of that history – a redemption covering effectively “all they that are of faith.”
Patiently God waited for “the fullness of time” that He might send His Son and “at this time” “declare” “His righteousness.” His righteousness was, of course, always a settled matter – always the same – but it awaited the cross of Christ for its declaration to man. Surely the subject, thoughtful heart can only marvel in beholding such patience, such wisdom, such grace, such righteousness, such power, such unspeakable love. Blessed beyond expression are the character and ways of our God!
So that God is manifestly declared as a perfectly just God, and at the same time “the Justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.” The law could accuse, but only God can justify. “It is God that justifieth: who is he that condemneth?” (Rom 8:33-34). How quiet, calm, and holy a resting-place for the soul who believes in Jesus!
There is no more room for the proud boasting of man. “It is excluded.” Blessed relief when it is so! But does a man’s trust in his own works exclude boasting? No indeed; but the opposite. Confidence in works is mere self-confidence, self-assurance, self-assertion, self-exaltation. Hence, when a “law” is spoken of it is “the law of faith” – a law that requires faith, not a law that requires works. “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” Lovely conclusion of the whole matter: marvelous and sublime in the glory it gives wholly and solely to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! Moreover, how different a conclusion to that of the book of Ecclesiastes, where in Ecc 12:13 we read, “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep His commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.” Is there contradiction in the two conclusions? Not at all. For Ecclesiastes deals with “man’s duty,” (while he lives “under the sun”), and God’s judgment (in the very last verse); while Romans presents to us man’s complete failure and guilt, and God’s justification. The entire difference consists in this – that the cross of Christ comes between the two books.
But the conclusion might be a startling one to a Jew. For if a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law, this would favor Gentiles as much as Jews. This very fact has been a great stumbling block to the Jews ever since Christianity has been preached. But “Is God the God of the Jews only? is He not also of the Gentiles?” Shall He who has created all men deny to some of them the possibility of being justified from their sins, while at the same time granting this blessing to others? Impossible! “There is no respect of persons with God”: if “all have sinned,” the Gospel is “unto all.” If all do not receive it, that is another matter; they shall die in their sins: but God’s offer is to all, without partiality.
For He is “one God” – His character is unvarying in dealing with whatever people. Those under law He can justify only “by faith” – that is, on the principle of faith as opposed to the principle of law. Those without law – “the uncircumcision” – He justifies as fully “through faith,” – that is simply if they have faith in His Son.
Will the Jew object that this nullifies the law?Will he claim that Paul so stresses faith as to “make void the law”? The very thought is an unworthy one. Faith establishes the law: it puts law in its proper place; gives the law its very strength; regards it in its absolute sternness, justice, and inflexibility; acknowledges fully its “ministration of death,” – its “”ministration of condemnation” – that it condemns, and will not justify a sinner. Hence, faith cannot impute to it “the ministration of life,” “the ministration of righteousness,” for these ministrations are not by the law of God, but by the grace of God (2Co 3:1-18).
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
Verse 1
What advantage, &c. The discussion, for a considerable part of this chapter, appears to take the form of a dialogue–a very common form of discussion, both in ancient and modern times.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
SECTION 8 YET THE JEWS HAVE REAL ADVANTAGES
CH. 3:1-9
What then is the advantage of the Jew, or what the profit of circumcision? Much, in every way. First, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God. For why? If some had no faith, shall their lack of faith make of no effect the faith of God? Be it not so. Let God be true, but every man a liar: according as it is written, In order that Thou mayest be justified in Thy words, and mayest overcome when Thou comest into judgment.
But if our unrighteousness gives proof of Gods righteousness, what shall we say? Is God, who inflicts His anger, unrighteous? (I say it as a man.) Be it not so. Else, how will God judge the world? For if the truth of God through my lie abounded for His glory, why am I also judged as a sinner? And why not, according as we are evil-spoken of, and as some affirm that we say, Let us do the evil things that the good things may come? Whose judgment is just.
What then? Are we shielding ourselves? Not at all. For we have before-accused both Jews and Greeks that all are under sin.
This section has two broadly-marked divisions. Rom 3:1-4 answer an objection suggested by Rom 2:28-29 : and Rom 3:5-9 overturn a final objection to the teaching of Romans 2, an objection suggested by this answer.
Rom 3:1. Question prompted by the assertion in Rom 2:25 that to those who keep the Law circumcision profits, and the assertion in Rom 2:28-29 that the distinctions which avail are not outward but inward. In what then does the Jew go beyond the Gentile, and what is the profit of circumcision?
Rom 3:2. He gains much, from every point of view. Several proofs come to Pauls mind. As in Rom 1:8, he mentions the first of them. A more complete catalogue of advantages is given in Rom 9:4.
Entrusted-with: literally believed: same word in same sense in 1Co 9:17; Gal 2:7; 1Th 2:4; 1Ti 1:11; Tit 1:3; Luk 16:11; Joh 2:24 : see note under Rom 4:25.
The oracles of God: solemn utterances: so (LXX.) Psa 107:11; Psa 12:6; Num 24:4; etc.; and Heb 5:12; 1Pe 4:11. Same word used by the Greeks for the answers, chiefly prophetic, given by their gods at Delphi or elsewhere to those who sought their counsel. But I have no proof that the phrase is ever used to denote the Old Testament as a whole. It is therefore best to understand by the oracles of God the direct utterances of God to man preserved in the O.T. and forming its most important element. Such are Gen 12:1-3; Gen 12:7; Gen 13:14; Eze 2:1-8; Eze 3:1; Eze 3:3-11; and they are the Holy of Holies of the sanctuary of the Jewish Scriptures, Like the Greek oracles, they were chiefly prophetic. They were entrusted to the Jews (cp. Act 7:38) for the ultimate good of all men. And possession of them was, in Pauls day, the great advantage of the Jew. While the Greeks were vainly discussing the nature of the gods, the Jews read in the sacred books about the Creator of the world, who became the God of Abraham. This was Pauls first proof of the profit of being a circumcised Jew rather than a heathen. Another significance of the rite is mentioned in Rom 4:11.
Rom 3:3. Questions confirming the above proof of the advantage of being a Jew, by calling out and overturning an objection. This objection breaks off the list of advantages Paul was beginning to give.
Had-no-faith: in Christ and the Gospel. For this was all-important in Pauls day for determining a Jews relation to God.
If some: how large a proportion of the nation had no faith in Christ, the readers knew well. But the unbelievers were at most only a part of the nation.
Faith (or faithfulness) of God: not reliance upon God, as in Mar 11:22 (cp. Gal 2:16; Gal 2:20); but that stability and constancy of God on which His servants rely in sure confidence that He will fulfil His promises. For the verse following proves that an attribute of God is in question. See note under Rom 4:25.
Make-of-no-effect: to make inoperative and without result: same word in Rom 3:31; Rom 4:14; Rom 6:6; Rom 7:2; Rom 7:6, and very often with Paul. If God do not fulfil His promises, His own faithfulness will go for nothing. The ancient oracles were designed to prepare a way for, and to lead men to, Christ and the Gospel. But the mass of the nation had rejected Him and disbelieved the good news. And it might be thought that God will refuse to fulfil promises, e.g. Jer 31:31 ff and Eze 36:25 ff, which to so many had failed of their purpose. If so, the oracles have lost their value, and possession of them is no longer an advantage to the Jew. But Pauls question reminds us that in the promises the faithfulness of God is pledged, and that to suppose that they will fail is to suppose that mans want of faith will make God unfaithful. Cp. 2Ti 2:13.
Rom 3:4. An emphatic negative answer to the foregoing question, confirmed by a quotation from the Old Testament.
God is true in that His words always correspond with reality. See under Rom 1:18. If he were unfaithful, he would be untrue. For He foresees whatever He will do. When He spoke the promises, He foresaw Israels unbelief and His own conduct in reference to it. Consequently, to give promises which He foresaw that He would not fulfil, would be deliberate falsehood. And this we cannot conceive. Rather let us say that God is true, and therefore faithful, in His treatment of a race of which every man is guilty of falsehood. The objection is answered. Every believing Jew can claim fulfilment of the promises old and new, even though the mass of the nation has rejected Him in whom the promises were to be fulfilled. Therefore the unbelief of others does not destroy the benefit of being born in a land where the promises are known.
According as it is written: as in Rom 1:17. What Paul has just deduced from the character of God is in harmony with the ancient Scriptures. Paul quotes, word for word, LXX. Psa 51:4.
Justified: looked upon, declared to be, and treated as, righteous: see note under Rom 3:26.
In Thy words: the matter in which God submits Himself to the judgment of men.
Mayest overcome: as when a man gains his suit in a court of law.
Comest into judgment: by submitting his conduct and words to the judgment of men. The Psalmist confesses his own sin, Against Thee only I have sinned, and that which is evil before Thee I have done;
in order that, in condemning that sin, Gods words may be seen to be just and He may receive at the bar of mans moral sense a verdict of approval. This implies the justice of Gods condemnation of sinners even in Israel.
The exact rendering of the Hebrew is, In order that Thou mayest be righteous when Thou speakest, be pure when thou judgest. But the common Greek rendering was sufficiently accurate for Pauls purpose. For the words righteous and pure denote evidently righteousness and purity in the eyes of men: and the whole passage implies that God seeks, even when pronouncing judgment, the approval of men. If so, He may be said to come into judgment and to be justified.
Paul has now guarded against serious perversion his teaching in Rom 2:28-29. Some might infer from it that he looked upon the outward distinctions of the Jew as worthless, and denied the divine origin of the covenant which created them. To Jews, this would be a serious objection to his teaching, and a weapon with which they would oppose it: and on the other hand it might lead those who accepted it to underrate the earlier dispensation. Paul guards against this double danger by declaring the great advantage of the Jews, and by quoting as the chief of them their possession of the records of the historic revelations of God to Israel. And he proves that the worth of these records is not lessened by the unbelief of so many of those to whom for the worlds good they were entrusted. For, in the promises, Gods character is involved: and this cannot be set aside by mans unfaithfulness.
Notice here and throughout the epistle Pauls carefulness to defend at every point the divine origin of the Old Covenant.
The great lesson of Rom 3:3-4 is that Gods character is a pledge that, whatever man may do, He will fulfil His promises on the conditions therein expressed. It is easy to apply this to ourselves. As we come to claim the promises of God, we remember that these promises have been by us again and again neglected and doubted and disbelieved; and that at this moment they are set at nought by the mass of mankind. Dare we expect that God will fulfil promises so frequently trampled under foot? Yes: He will fulfil them even to the letter. For our unbelief cannot make Him unfaithful. The inseparable connection of His character and His words is proof that every promise will be fulfilled. And, if so, the promises, however neglected, are of inestimable value to those who possess them. Under them lies, and in them we take hold of, the faithfulness of God.
A tradition embodied, both in the Hebrew text and in the LXX., in the superscription to Psalms 51 attributes it to David as an expression of his deep penitence after Nathans rebuke ( 2Sa 12:7) of his sin with Bathsheba. And we notice that, in spite of this terrible sin, which was severely punished, God fulfilled His covenanted promise to David recorded in 2Sa 7:4-17. No better example could be found of the faithfulness of God in spite of the unfaithfulness of man.
Rom 3:5-9. The quotation in Rom 3:4, which is illustrated by the story of Davids deep sin, reminds us that the sin of man, so far from provoking unfaithfulness in God, sometimes brings out into clearer light His faithfulness and truth. But even this truth may be perverted into a last refuge for the man who lives in sin and yet hopes to escape from judgment. By the question in Rom 3:5, Paul discovers the refuge; and shows in Rom 3:6-9 how untenable it is.
Rom 3:5. Two questions, in which the readers are supposed to join. They introduce, by way of inference from Rom 3:4, an objection.
Unrighteousness: including the unbelief of most of the Jews, the falsehood of all men, and Davids sin.
Gods righteousness: that God is righteous, as in Rom 3:25-26. This meaning, different from that in Rom 3:21-22; Rom 1:17, is determined by the question, Is God unrighteous? and by the word justified in Rom 3:4. It is the agreement between Gods treatment of men and the principles underlying the Law. Men behold and declare this agreement, and thus justify God. We often observe that, as in the case of David, mans sin gives occasion for a manifestation of Gods strict justice. Paul asks, What shall we infer from this? Shall we say, because our unrighteousness gives-proof-of Gods righteousness, that God is unrighteous when He inflicts His anger, i.e. when he punishes men for their sin? These questions expose a covert attack on the teaching of Romans 2, viz. that to punish sin is unjust, because the punishment reveals the uprightness of God.
As a man: asking a foolish question.
Rom 3:6-8. An absolute denial, supported by two other questions. The principle underlying the questions of Rom 3:5 would make it impossible for God to judge the world, and would justify an immoral maxim.
Rom 3:7. Following Tischendorf, and Westcotts text, the R.V. reads but if, making Rom 3:7 an additional statement or a new argument. Lachmann and Tregelles read for if, making it expound or confirm the argument underlying Rom 3:6. This latter reading is given in the margins of Westcott and of the Revisers. The documentary evidence seems to me slightly to favour it. Moreover, the argument in Rom 3:6 needs exposition and support: and this it finds in Rom 3:7. This logical connection might easily be overlooked by a copyist; and the words but if might be suggested by the same words in Rom 3:5. Consequently, the slight change from for to but is more easily accounted for than the converse change. For these reasons, I prefer the reading in the Revisers margin, and take Rom 3:7 as expounding the argument underlying Rom 3:6.
My lie I also: Paul appeals to his own case.
The truth of God: as in Rom 3:4.
Abound: work itself out into abundant results: so Rom 5:15; Rom 15:13.
For His glory: so 2Co 4:15 : direction and tendency of this abundant manifestation of Gods truthfulness, viz. to evoke mans admiration of the moral grandeur of God. Paul declared in Rom 3:4 that God is truthful in His treatment and judgment of a race of liars. Therefore every lie, by bringing upon itself the foretold punishment, will give additional proof of Gods veracity and thus more abundantly reveal His moral greatness. And if so, every man in the world may claim immunity from punishment. Every Jew and Gentile may come before the judgment-seat and say, Why am I also judged as a sinner? Even Paul himself, if all that his enemies said about him were true, could say this. Admit once this principle, and God cannot judge the world. Notice how the language and tone of this verse differ from the coldness of Western thought and speech. Paul meets a man who claims immunity from punishment because his sin brings glory to God; and at once puts himself by the mans side and says that he also and everyone else may claim the same immunity.
Rom 3:8. Another disproof of the principle underlying the question in Rom 3:5.
Evil-spoken-of: blasphemed, as in Rom 2:24.
We: probably Paul and other Christian teachers. Some spoke evil of Paul and his companions by saying that they taught men to do bad things in order that good results might follow. Without discussing the truth of this charge, Paul makes use of a correct principle underlying it. The actions which it is unjust to punish it must be just to perform. If the end justifies the means, a man cannot be blamed who deliberately does wrong in order to bring about a good result. But this is what Pauls enemies bring as a charge against him. By so doing, they admit that the principle involved is wrong: and if so, the question in Rom 3:5 b must be answered, as Paul has answered it, in the negative.
Whose judgment: the sentence pronounced by God on those who assert the principle attributed to Paul, a principle which he agrees with his opponents in condemning.
Rom 3:9. What then? how do matters stand? so Rom 6:15; Rom 11:7.
Are-we-shielding-ourselves? literally holding before ourselves, i.e. as an excuse. This plain grammatical meaning (R.V. marg.) of the word here used gives good sense, and is therefore better than the unintelligible R.V.
text, are we in worse case than they? We have seen that the principle called in question in Rom 3:5, viz. that it is unjust of God to punish sins which give proof of His justice, involves two serious moral consequences, viz. that not even a liar could be condemned as a sinner, and that it would be right to do wrong in order that good may come. We must therefore either accept these consequences or deny the principle which involves them. Paul asks, Which alternative do we take? Is it our object to prove that there are no moral distinctions and will be no judgment? Are we, by stating this alternative, holding before ourselves a shield behind which we may escape punishment?
Not at all, or in every way not: absolute rejection of this side of the alternative. This rejection is proved by the foregoing argument in Rom 1:18 to Rom 2:29 : for we have before-accused etc. Both Jews and Greeks, all: the latter in 4, and the former in 5-7.
Under sin: so Rom 7:14 : looked upon as a crushing weight under which the sinner lies, or a power from whose grasp he cannot escape. Notice here an assertion, even more plain than Rom 2:1, that all men are sinners. This tremendous and universal charge is complete proof that the arguments in Rom 3:5-8 are not an excuse for sin.
Rom 3:5-9 reveal Pauls purpose in choosing for his proof-text Psa 51:4. It suggests a truth which may be perverted into a last excuse for sin. Davids sin showed forth the sinlessness of God, and thus served a moral purpose: and all sin will eventually do the same. But is it not unjust for God to punish the sin of which He makes use to manifest His own glory and to accomplish His own purposes? Such a question is proof of human folly. Paul meets it with an indignant negative. If this be unjust, to judge the world is unjust and therefore impossible. In this world of liars every man might say, My lie, by bringing on my head the threatened punishment, will show forth the truthfulness of God. If others escape because their sin glorifies God, why may not I also escape? Thus the whole world would find excuse. Again, since all sin will eventually reveal the absolute uprightness of God, a man might deliberately go into sin with this in view. It would be right to do wrong: because all wrong will show forth the righteousness of God. A man might justly do the very things which our enemies bring as a charge against us that we teach men to do. But our opponents, by making this a charge against us, condemn it. In their condemnation, I agree. Hence either God is just when He punishes the sin of which He makes use to accomplish His own purposes, or the teaching with which we are falsely charged is right and the judgment day is a fiction. Which alternative do we accept? Are we weaving a cover for our sin? The arguments in Rom 1:18 to Rom 2:29 prove that we are not. We have already charged all men with sin, and proved that all sinners are exposed to punishment. The question in Rom 3:5 b is answered: a shield which would equally protect all sinners protects none.
Rom 3:1-9 supplements Romans 2. The man who, in Rom 2:2, claimed to escape the universal sentence has failed to make good his claim: he can hide himself neither (Rom 3:3-11) in the mercy of God, nor (Rom 3:12-24) in his possession of the Law, nor (Rom 3:25-29) in circumcision. Yet he cannot say that the accuser who has cast to the winds his excuses has thereby cast to the winds the reality of the advantages given by God to his fathers and to himself: for the privileges which he has failed to use are many and great. He cannot appeal to the glory which will accrue to God from his condemnation as a reason why the condemnation should not be carried out: for this appeal, if valid, would be valid for the whole world. The prisoner stands without reply before his accuser and before God.
Fuente: Beet’s Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament
3:1 What {1} advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
(1) The first address to the Jews, or the first anticipating of an objection by the Jews: what then, are the Jews preferred no more than the Gentiles? Indeed, they are, says the apostle, by the doing of God, for he committed the tables of the covenant to them, so that the unbelief of a few cannot cause the whole nation without exception to be cast away by God, who is true, and who also uses their unworthiness to commend and set forth his goodness.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
3. Answers to objections 3:1-8
In chapter 2 Paul showed that God’s judgment of all people rests on character rather than ceremony. He put the Jew on the same level as the Gentile regarding their standing before God. Still God Himself made a distinction between Jews and Gentiles. In Rom 3:1-8, Paul dealt with that distinction. He did this so there would be no question in the minds of his Jewish audience that they were guilty before God and needed to trust in Jesus Christ. The passage affirms the continuing faithfulness of God to His covenant people but clarifies that His faithfulness in no way precludes His judging sinful Jews.
"In thus allowing the Roman Christians to ’listen in’ on this dialogue, Paul warns his mainly Gentile audience that they should not interpret the leveling of distinctions between Jew and Gentile in terms of God’s judgment and salvation as the canceling of all the privileges of Israel." [Note: Moo, p. 180.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Paul asked four rhetorical questions in this section (Rom 3:1-8), questions that could have been in the mind of a Jewish objector. Probably Paul was simply posing these questions and objections to himself to clarify his view for his readers. This is, again, the diatribe style of rhetoric. "Then what" (Gr. ti oun) appears in Romans to raise questions about what Paul has taught to advance his argument (cf. Rom 3:9; Rom 4:1; Rom 6:1; Rom 6:15; Rom 7:7; Rom 8:31; Rom 9:14; Rom 9:19; Rom 9:30; Rom 11:7).
We could paraphrase the first question as follows. If Jews and Gentiles are both guilty before God, what advantage is there in being a Jew? Particularly, what advantage is there in being circumcised? The Old Testament regarded being a Jew and circumcision as privileges.
There are many advantages to being a circumcised Jew. Paul only gave the most important one here (Rom 3:2), but later he referred to others (Rom 9:4-5). The phrase "oracles of God" refers to special revelation. The word "oracles" (Gr. logia) stresses the fact that the Old Testament, and the Mosaic Law in particular, was the very utterance of God preserved and handed down by earlier generations (cf. Act 7:38; Heb 5:12; 1Pe 4:11). [Note: Cf. Sanday and Headlam pp. 70-71; and Harrison, p. 35.] "Entrusted" highlights Israel’s responsibility to guard and to propagate what she had received as a treasure.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 8
JEWISH CLAIMS: NO HOPE IN HUMAN MERIT
Rom 3:1-20
As the Apostle dictates, there rises before his mind a figure often seen by his eyes, the Rabbinic disputant. Keen, subtle, unscrupulous, at once eagerly in earnest yet ready to use any argument for victory, how often that adversary had crossed his path, in Syria, in Asia Minor, in Macedonia, in Achaia! He is present now to his consciousness, within the quiet house of Gaius; and his questions come thick and fast, following on this urgent appeal to his, alas! almost impenetrable conscience.
“What then is the advantage of the Jew? Or what is the profit of circumcision? If some did not believe, what of that? Will their faithlessness cancel Gods good faith?” “But if our unrighteousness sets off Gods righteousness, would God be unjust, bringing His wrath to bear?”
We group the questions together thus, to make it the clearer that we do enter here, at this opening of the third chapter, upon a brief controversial dialogue; perhaps the almost verbatim record of many a dialogue actually spoken. The Jew, pressed hard with moral proofs of his responsibility, must often have turned thus upon his pursuer, or rather have tried thus to escape from him in the subtleties of a false appeal to the faithfulness of God.
And first he meets the Apostles stern assertion that circumcision without spiritual reality will not save. He asks, where then is the advantage of Jewish descent? What is the profit, the good, of circumcision? It is a mode of reply not unknown in discussions on Christian ordinances; “What then is the good of belonging to a historic Church at all? What do you give the divine Sacraments to do?” The Apostle answers his questioner at once; Much, in every way; first, because they were entrusted with the Oracles of God. “First,” as if there were more to say in detail. Something, at least, of what is here left unsaid is said later, Rom 9:4-5, where he recounts the long roll of Israels spiritual and historical splendours; “the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the law giving, and the worship, and the promises, and the Fathers, and the Christ.” Was it nothing to be bound up with things like these, in a bond made at once of blood relationship, holy memories, and magnificent hopes? Was it nothing to be exhorted to righteousness, fidelity, and love by finding the individual life thus surrounded? But here he places “first” of even these wonderful treasures this, that Israel was “entrusted with the Oracles of God,” the Utterances of God, His unique Message to man “through His prophets, in the Holy Scriptures.” Yes, here was something which gave to the Jew an “advantage” without which the others would either have had no existence, or no significance. He was the trustee of Revelation. In his care was lodged the Book by which man was to live and die; through which he was to know immeasurably more about God and about himself than he could learn from all other informants put together. He, his people, his Church, were the “witness and keeper of Holy Writ.” And, therefore, to be born of Israel and ritually entered into the covenant of Israel, was to be born into the light of revelation, and committed to the care of the witnesses and keepers of the light.
To insist upon this immense privilege is altogether to St. Pauls purpose here. For it is a privilege which evidently carries an awful responsibility with it. What would be the guilt of the soul, and of the Community, to whom those Oracles were-not given as property, but entrusted-and who did not do the things they said?
Again the message passes on to the Israel of the Christian Church. “What advantage hath the Christian? What profit is there of Baptism?” “Much, in every way; first, because to the Church is entrusted the light of revelation.” To be born in it, to be baptised in it, is to be born into the sunshine of revelation, and laid on the heart and care of the Community which witnesses to the genuineness of its Oracles and sees to their preservation and their spread. Great is the talent. Great is the accountability.
But the Rabbinist goes on. For if some did not believe, what of that? Will their faithlessness cancel Gods good faith? These Oracles of God promise interminable glories to Israel, to Israel as a community, a body. Shall not that promise hold good for the whole mass, though some (bold euphemism for the faithless multitudes!) have rejected the Promiser? Will not the unbelieving Jew, after all, find his way to life eternal for his companys sake, for his part and lot in the covenant community? “Will Gods faith,” His good faith, His plighted word, be reduced to empty sounds by the bad Israelites sin? Away with the thought, the Apostle answers. Anything is more possible than that God should lie. Nay, let God prove true, and every man prove liar; as it stands written, {Psa 51:4} “That Thou mightest be justified in Thy words, and mightest overcome when Thou impleadest.” He quotes the Psalmist in that deep utterance of self-accusation, where he takes part against himself, and finds himself guilty “without one plea,” and, in the loyalty of the regenerate and now awakened soul, is jealous to vindicate the justice of his condemning God. The whole Scripture contains no more impassioned, yet no more profound and deliberate, utterance of the eternal truth that God is always in the right or He would be no God at all; that it is better, and more reasonable, to doubt anything than to doubt His righteousness, whatever cloud surrounds it, and whatever lightning bursts the cloud.
But again the caviller, intent not on Gods glory, but on his own position, takes up the word. But if our unrighteousness exhibits, sets off, Gods righteousness, if our sin gives occasion to grace to abound, if our guilt lets the generosity of Gods Way of Acceptance stand out the more wonderful by contrast-what shall we say? Would God be unjust, bringing His () wrath to bear on us, when our pardon would illustrate His free grace? Would He be unjust? Would He not be unjust?
We struggle, in our paraphrase, to bring out the bearing, as it seems to us, of a passage of almost equal grammatical difficulty and argumentative subtlety. The Apostle seems to be “in a strait” between the wish to represent the cavillers thought, and the dread of one really irreverent word. He throws the mans last question into a form which, grammatically, expects a “no” when the drift of the thought would lead us up to a shocking “yes.” And then at once he passes to his answer. “I speak as man,” man-wise; as if this question of balanced rights and wrongs were one between man and man, not between man and eternal God. Such talk, even for arguments sake, is impossible for the regenerate soul except under urgent protest. Away with the thought that He would not be righteous, in His punishment of any given sin. “Since how shall God judge the world?” How, on such conditions, shall we repose on the ultimate fact that He is the universal Judge? If He could not, righteously, punish a deliberate sin because pardon, under certain conditions, illustrates His glory, then He could not punish any sin at all. But He is the Judge; He does bring wrath to bear!
Now he takes up the caviller on his own ground, and goes all lengths upon it, and then flies with abhorrence from it. For if Gods truth, in the matter of my lie, has abounded, has come more amply out, to His glory, why am I too called to judgment as a sinner? And why not say, as the slander against us goes, and as some assert that we do say, “Let us do the ill that the good may come”? So they assert of us. But their doom is just, -the doom of those who would utter such a maxim, finding shelter for a lie under the throne of God.
No doubt he speaks from a bitter and frequent experience when he takes this particular case, and with a solemn irony claims exemption for himself from the liars, sentence of death. It is plain that the charge of untruth was, for some reason or another, often thrown at St. Paul; we see this in the marked urgency with which, from time to time, he asserts his truthfulness; “The things which I say, behold, before God I lie not”; {Gal 1:20} “I speak the truth in Christ and lie not”. {Rom 9:1} Perhaps the manifold sympathies of his heart gave innocent occasion sometimes for the charge. The man who could be “all things to all men,” {1Co 9:22} taking with a genuine insight their point of view, and saying things which showed that he took it, would be very likely to be set down by narrower minds as untruthful. And the very boldness of his teaching might give further occasion, equally innocent; as he asserted at different times, with equal emphasis, opposite sides of truth. But these somewhat subtle excuses for false witness against this great master of holy sincerity would not be necessary where genuine malice was at work. No man is so truthful that he cannot be charged with falsehood; and no charge is so likely to injure even where it only feigns to strike. And of course the mighty paradox of Justification lent itself easily to the distortions, as well as to the contradictions, of sinners. “Let us do evil that good may come” no doubt represented the report which prejudice and bigotry would regularly carry away and spread after every discourse, and every argument, about free Forgiveness. It is so still: “If this is true, we may live as we like; if this is true, then the worst sinner makes the best saint.” Things like this have been current sayings since Luther, since Whitefield, and till now. Later in the Epistle we shall see the unwilling evidence which such distortions bear to the nature of the maligned doctrine; but here the allusion is too passing to bring this out.
“Whose doom is just.” What a witness is this to the inalienable truthfulness of the Gospel! This brief stern utterance absolutely repudiates all apology for means by end; all seeking of even the good of men by the way of saying the thing that is not. Deep and strong, almost from the first, has been the temptation to the Christian man to think otherwise, until we find whole systems of casuistry developed whose aim seems to be to go as near the edge of untruthfulness as possible, if not beyond it, in religion. But the New Testament sweeps the entire idea of the pious fraud away, with this short thunder peal, “Their doom is just.” It will hear of no unholiness that leaves out truthfulness; no word, no deed, no habit, that even with the purest purpose belies the God of reality and veracity.
If we read aright Act 24:20-21, with Act 23:6, we see St. Paul himself once, under urgent pressure of circumstances, betrayed into an equivocation, and then, publicly and soon, expressing his regret of conscience. “I am a Pharisee, and a Pharisees son; about the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.” True, true in fact, but not the whole truth, not the unreserved account of his attitude towards the Pharisee. Therefore, a week later, he confesses, does he not? that in this one thing there was “evil in him, while he stood before the council.” Happy the Christian, happy indeed the Christian public man, immersed in management and discussion, whose memory is as clear about truth telling, and whose conscience is as sensitive!
What then? are we superior? Say not so at all. Thus now he proceeds, taking the word finally from his supposed antagonist. Who are the “we,” and with whom are “we” compared? The drift of the argument admits of two replies to this question. “We” may be “we Jews”; as if Paul placed himself in instinctive sympathy, by the side of the compatriot whose cavils he has just combated, and gathered up here into a final assertion all he has said before of the (at least) equal guilt of the Jew beside the Greek. Or “we” may be “we Christians,” taken for the moment as men apart from Christ; it may be a repudiation of the thought that he has been speaking from a pedestal, or from a tribunal. As if he said, “Do not think that I, or my friends in Christ, would say to the world, Jewish or Gentile, that we are holier than you. No; we speak not from the bench, but from the bar. Apart from Him who is our peace and life, we are in the same condemnation. It is exactly because we are in it that we turn and say to you, Do not ye fear God?” On the whole, this latter reference seems the truer to the thought and spirit of the whole context.
For we have already charged Jews and Greeks, all of them, with being under sin; with being brought under sin, as the Greek bids us more exactly render, giving us the thought that the race has fallen from a good estate into an evil; self-involved in an awful super-incumbent ruin. As it stands written, that there is not even one man righteous; there is not a man who understands, not a man who seeks his () God. All have left the road; they have turned worthless together. There is not a man who does what is good, there is not. even so many as one. A grave set open is their throat, exhaling the stench of polluted words; with their tongues they have deceived; asps venom is under their lips; (men) whose mouth is brimming with curse and bitterness. Swift are their feet to shed blood; ruin and misery for their victims are in their ways; and the way of peace they never knew. There is no such thing as fear of God before their eyes.
Here is a tesselation of Old Testament oracles. The fragments, hard and dark, come from divers quarries; from the Psalms, {Psa 5:9; Psa 10:7; Psa 14:1-3; Psa 36:1; Psa 140:3} from the Proverbs, {Pro 1:16} from Isaiah. {Isa 59:7} All in the first instance depict and denounce classes of sins and sinners in Israelite society; and we may wonder at first sight how their evidence convicts all men everywhere, and in all time, of condemnable and fatal sin. But we need not only, in submission, own that somehow it must be so, for “it stands written” here; we may see, in part, now it is so. These special charges against certain sorts of human lives stand in the same Book which levels the general charge against “the human heart,” {Jer 17:9} that it is “deceitful above all things, hopelessly diseased,” and incapable of knowing all its own corruption. The crudest surface phenomena of sin are thus never isolated from the dire underlying epidemic of the race of man. The actual evil of men shows the potential evil of man. The tiger strokes of open wickedness show the tiger nature, which is always present, even when its possessor least suspects it. Circumstances infinitely vary, and among them those internal circumstances which we call special tastes and dispositions. But everywhere amidst them all is the human heart, made upright in its creation, self-wrecked into moral wrongness when it turned itself from God. That it is turned from Him, not to Him, appears when its direction is tested by the collision between His claim and its will And in this aversion from the Holy One, who claims the whole heart, there lies at least the potency of “all unrighteousness.”
Long after this, as his glorious rest drew near, St. Paul wrote again of the human heart, to “his true son” Titus. {Tit 3:3} He reminds him of the wonder of that saving grace which he so fully unfolds in this Epistle; how, “not according to our works,” the “God who loveth man” had saved Titus, and saved Paul. And what had he saved them from? From a state in which they were “disobedient, deceived, the slaves of divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another.” What, the loyal and laborious Titus, the chaste, the upright, the unutterably earnest Paul? Is not the picture greatly, lamentably exaggerated, a burst of religious rhetoric? Adolphe Monod tells us that he once thought it must be so; he felt himself quite unable to submit to the awful witness. But years moved, and he saw deeper into himself, seeing deeper into the holiness of God; and the truthfulness of that passage grew upon him. Not that its difficulties all vanished, but its truthfulness shone out, “and sure I am,” he said from his death bed, “that when this veil of flesh shall fall I shall recognise in that passage the truest portrait ever painted of my own natural heart.”
Robert Browning, in a poem of terrible moral interest and power, confesses that, amidst a thousand doubts and difficulties, his mind was anchored to faith in Christianity by the fact of its doctrine of Sin:
“I still, to suppose it true, for my part See reasons and reasons; this, to begin; Tis the faith that launched point-blank her dart At the head of a lie; taught Original Sin, The Corruption of Mans Heart.”
Now we know that whatever things the Law says, it speaks them to those in the Law, those within its range, its dominion; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may. prove guilty with regard to God. “The Law”; that is to say, here, the Old Testament Revelation. This not only contains the Mosaic and Prophetic moral code, but has it for one grand pervading object, in all its parts, to prepare man for Christ by exposing him to himself, in his shame and need. It shows him in a thousand ways that “he cannot serve the Lord,” {Jos 24:19} on purpose that in that same Lord he may take refuge from both his guilt and his impotency. And this it does for “those in the Law”; that is to say here, primarily, for the Race, the Church, whom it surrounded with its light of holy fire, and whom in this passage the Apostle has in his first thoughts. Yet they, surely, are not alone upon his mind. We have seen already how “the Law” is, after all, only the more full and direct enunciation of “law”; so that the Gentile as well as the Jew has to do with the light, and with the responsibility, of a knowledge of the will of God. While the chain of stern quotations we have just handled lies heaviest on Israel, it yet binds the world. It “shuts every mouth.” It drags man in guilty before God.
“That every mouth may be stopped.” Oh, solemn silence, when at last it comes! The harsh or muffled voices of self-defence, of self-assertion are hushed at length. The man, like one of old, when he saw his righteous self in the light of God, “lays his hand on his mouth”. {Job 11:4} He leaves speech to God, and learns at last to listen. What shall he hear? An external repudiation? An objurgation, and then a final and exterminating anathema? No, something far other, and better, and more wonderful. But there must first be silence on mans part, if it is to be heard. “Hear-and your souls shall live.”
So the great argument pauses, gathered up into an utterance which at once concentrates what has gone before, and prepares us for a glorious sequel. Shut thy mouth, O man, and listen now:
Because by means of works of law there shall be justified no flesh in His presence; for by means of law comes moral knowledge of sin.