THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL
TO THE
THESSALONIANS, GALATIANS, EOMANS,
WITH CEITICAL NOTES AND DISSEKTATIONS.
VOL. II.
LONDON
FEINTED BY S1OTT1SWOODE AND CO.
NEW STKK1I BQUAEB.
THE EPISTLES OF ST, PAUL
TO TIIE
THESSALONIANS, GALATIANS, ROMANS.
WITH CRITICAL NOTES AND DISSERTATIONS
BY THE KEY. BENJAMIN JOWETT, M.A.
REGIUS PROFESSOR OF GREEK IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD.
IN TWO VOLUMES. YOL. II.
(Ebition.
LONDON
JOHN MUEEAY, ALBEMAKLE STEEET.
1859
ffis right of translation is reserved.
CONTENTS
THE SECOND VOLUME.
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS-
Page
INTRODUCTION . . . . 3
Subject of the Epistle .29
Time and Place ... .36
CHAPTER I. 41
On the Connexion of Immorality and Idolatry .... 70
On the State of the Heathen World 74
CHAPTER II 78
On the Abstract Ideas of the New Testament, in connexion with
Romans, I. 17 96
On the Modes of Time and Place in Scripture . . . .110
CHAPTER III 117
CHAPTER IV 142
The Old Testament 156
CHAPTER V 160
On the Imputation of the Sin of Adam 180
CHAPTER VI 188
CHAPTER VII. 204
On Conversion and Changes of Character ..... 222
CHAPTER VIII 250
CHAPTERS IX. XI 268
Contrasts of Prophecy 318
CHAPTERS XII XVI 337
CHAPTER XIII. 356
VI CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
Page
CHAPTER XIV 368
Casuistry 384
CHAPTER XV. ........ 403
CHAPTER XVI 422
Natural Religion 43^
The Law as the Strength of Sin ..... .495
On Righteousness by Faith 523
On Atonement and Satisfaction 547
On Predestination and Free-will 595
THE EPISTLE
TO
THE ROMANS,
VOL. II.
THE
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
INTRODUCTION.
THE Epistle to the Romans has ever been regarded as first in
importance among the Epistles of St. Paul, the cornerstone of that
Gospel which he preached among the Gentiles. Not only does it
present more completely than other parts of Scripture the doctrine
of righteousness by faith, but it connects this doctrine with the
state of mankind in general, embracing Jew and Gentile at once in
its view, alternating them with each other in the counsels of Pro
vidence. It looks into the world within, without losing sight of the
world which is without. It is less than the other Epistles concerned
with the disputes or wants of a particular Church, and more with
the greater needs of human nature itself. It turns an eye backward
on the times of past ignorance both in the individual and mankind,
and again looks forward to the restoration of the Jews and to the
manifestation of the sons of God. It speaks of the law itself in
language which even now " that the law is dead to us and we to the
law," still pierces to the dividing asunder of the flesh and spirit.
No other portion of the New Testament gives a similarly connected
view of the ways of God to man ; no other is spread over truths so
far from us and yet so near to us.
It is not, however, this higher and more universal aspect of the
Epistle to the Romans with which we are at present immediately con-
B 2
4 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
cerned. Our first question is a critical and historical one : What was
the Roman Church, and in what relation did it stand to the Apostle ?
The difficulty in answering this question partly arises from the very
universality of the subject of the Epistle. The great argument takes us
out of the accidents of time and place. We cannot distinctly recognise
what we but remotely see, the particular and individual features of
which are lost in the width of the prospect. Could the Apostle
himself have had, and therefore is it to be expected that he could
communicate to us, the same vivid personal conception of the Church
at Rome as of Churches whose members were individually known
to him, whom, in his own language, he had himself begotten in the
Gospel? In an Epistle written from a distance to converts un
known to him by face, it is not to be supposed that there will be
found even the materials for conjecture which are supplied by the
Epistles to the Galatians and Corinthians. Naturally the personality
of the writer, and still more of those whom he is addressing, falls
into the background. He writes upon general topics which are
equally applicable to almost all Churches, which fail, therefore, to
throw any light on the particular Church to which the Epistle is
addressed. Nor can this dimness of the critical eye receive any
assistance from external sources. With the exception of the well-
known command of Claudius to the Jews to depart from Rome about
fifteen years previously, to which we may add the faint traces of a
Christian Church which was apparently distinct from the Jews, in
Acts, xxviii. 15., and the separate mention of Christians in Tacitus
and Suetonius, nothing has come down to us which throws any light,
however uncertain, on the beginnings of the Roman Church.
It is natural that this deficiency of real knowledge should produce
many different theories respecting the general scope of the Epistle
and the elements out of which the Roman Church was composed.
That it was addressed to Jews, that it was addressed to Gentiles,
that it was addressed to a mixed community of Jews and Gentiles,
that it is a doctrinal treatise, that it arose out of the circumstances
of the converts themselves, that it was written rather from the
INTRODUCTION. 5
Apostle s own mind than adapted to the thoughts or state of those
whom he is addressing, are all of them opinions which find some
degree of support from passages in the Epistle itself. While to some
the Epistle to the Romans appears like an enlarged edition of that
to the Galatians, containing the same opposition of Jew and Gentile,
there are other minds who think they find in it a nearer analogy
and resemblance to the Epistle to the Hebrews, or even to the
Corinthians. Nor is the inquiry on which we are entering really
separable from the larger inquiry into the general state of the Apos
tolical age. The manner in which the transition was effected from
Judaism to Christianity, the steps by which men were led to reflect
the light of the world upon the Law and the Prophets, the degree of
opposition which existed between the old and new, are questions
which, though far from being absolutely determined, must never
theless be taken into consideration in any attempt to define the posi
tion and character of the Roman Church.
The interest that attaches to the origin of that great ecclesiastical
dominion which was to cover the world, though connected by little
more than a name with the earlier Greek community which is the
subject of our investigation, and the yet stronger interest in
" gathering up the fragments that remain, that nothing be lost,"
respecting the great Epistle of the Gentile Apostle, will justify our
lingering awhile around the probabilities and points of view which
have been suggested by commentators, No pains can be too great
to illustrate even the least words that bear upon the history of the
Apostolical age. Small as the result may be, yet the inquiry will be
fruitful. Nor need we be afraid of multiplying uncertainties. The
light of theory seems to be needed to make us observe facts. The
opinions of almost all have probably contributed something to the
increasing clearness and distinctness with which we are able to
determine the limits of our knowledge on this subject.
The Epistle to the Romans has been regarded as a sort of theo
logical treatise on the great question of Jewish and Gentile differ
ences ; addressed, it has been sometimes said, to the metropolis of
B 3
6 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
the world, as the Epistle to the Hebrews is addressed to the Jewish
nation generally. In support of such a view may be urged the
continuity of the Epistle itself, in which a single theme is worked
out at great length and in many points of view ; also, the com
parative absence of personal allusions, which are confined to the
first and the two last chapters. All the earlier Epistles of St. Paul
overflow with expressions of feeling and interest ; they are full of
himself andof his converts, abounding in hopes and fears, in joys and
anxieties. He constantly refers in them to what he has been told,
and has much to say in return to those to whom he is writing. It
is otherwise with the Epistle to the Romans. We have only to cut
off from the main body of the Epistle its commencement and con
clusion, to be aware of its great difference from the Galatians and
Corinthians. It is an Epistle of which the admiring readers might
still say, " His letters are weighty and powerful," and in writing
which the Apostle would become increasingly conscious of the new
source of influence which had opened to him ; but it is also an
Epistle unlike his earlier ones, more methodical in its arrange
ment, arising out of no previous information conveyed to him from
the Church itself, and referring to no circumstances that imply any
precise knowledge of its actual state.
Yet we have reason to hesitate before we ascribe to the Apostle a
treatise on Justification by Faith, because the expression itself
introduces associations inconsistent with the simplicity of the Apos
tolical age. The Epistles of St. Paul were not to the first disciples
what time has made them to us. They were a part of his ministry,
in style oral rather than written, and very unlike a regular literary
work. He who lived inwardly the life of all the churches did not
sit down at a desk to compose a book. Even the change which has
been alluded to was probably unobserved by himself. What he
wrote was the accident of what he was ; the expansion of an
ordinary letter into the only topics which had any interest for
himself or the first believers, in which the common things of life
had become absorbed and extinguished, that the hidden things
INTRODUCTION. 7
might be revealed. There is no reason to suppose that he wrote to
the Christians in Rome with any peculiar feeling of the dignity of
the imperial city ; or that its greatness roused in him any new sense
of his high calling as the Apostle of the Gentiles. Amid that vast
multitude of all countries and nations, and in all that varied scene
of power and magnificence, his only concern was with those few
brethren, the report of whom had reached him in Greece and Asia,
who were called by the name of Christ, with whom he desires to
make acquaintance by letter, not without a hope that he may one
day see them.
But if the Epistle is not to be regarded as a treatise, if it be
written as a man writ.es to his friends, not without reference to
their feelings and circumstances, the question from which we digressed
again arises, " What was the origin of the Roman Church, and what
were the elements of which it was composed ? " Was it Jewish or
Gentile, or made up equally of Jews and Gentiles ? or a Church of
which the majority were one or the other, or one which, though of
Jewish origin, was gradually opening the door wide to the Gentiles,
or which, consisting originally of Gentiles, was Jewish in its prac
tice and teaching, as being founded by the party of the circumcision,
resting on " those who seemed to be pillars " (Gal. ii. 9.), the
Apostles, as they are described by St. Paul, that " were in Christ
before him " (Rom. xvi. 7.) ? The Gentile Apostle is often " fearful
of building upon another man s foundation." Who are they whom
he nevertheless addresses, and to whom he stands in a sort of per
sonal relation, though not his own converts ? Only an imperfect
answer can be given to these questions, the materials for which
must be sought mainly in the character and tendency of the Epistle
itself. An examination of some of the principal opinions on the
subject will be a convenient way of bringing together the facts which
bear upon it.
1. Neander is of opinion that the Epistle to the Romans was
addressed to a Church consisting mainly of Gentile Christians ; " to
whom," he says, " the Gospel had been published by men of the
u 4
8 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
Pauline School, independently of the Mosaic Law, and to whom
Paul, as the Apostle of the Gentiles, felt himself called upon to
write." The Roman Church had grown up without him, but seemed
to have a claim upon him to receive from his lips that Gospel which
he preached among other Gentiles. Though at a distance from him,
it was his proper field of labour. The Christians at Rome would
not have been addressed by him had they been Jews. Least of all
would he have included his own countrymen in the general term
" other Gentiles " (i. 5.). But if so, we are compelled to admit that
the Epistle could not have been addressed to a Church composed of
Jewish Christians.
Other subsidiary proofs may be urged on the same side of the
argument : First, Tacitus brief notice of the Neroniau persecu
tion, in which the Christians are spoken of as a distinct body and
known by a separate name, which would not have been the case had
they been of Jewish origin. Such a mention of them, at any rate,
falls in with the supposition of a Gentile rather than a Jewish
Church. To which may be added, secondly, the argument of
Olshausen, that the discrepancy between the last chapter of the Acts
and the Epistle to the Romans can be reconciled only by supposing
that the Jews at Rome must have been widely separated from the
Roman Church, the fame of which even before St. Paul s visit "is
known throughout the world." (Rom. i. 8.) For in the narrative, at
the end of the Acts, of St. Paul s visit to Rome, he appears as
introducing himself to the Jews, who had heard nothing of the
proceedings against him in Judea, and desired him " to instruct
them concerning that way which was everywhere spoken against."
Must they not have been strangers to the Christians at Rome,
if they had not heard of these things ? and could that have been a
Jewish Christian Church which was unknown to the Jews in the
same city ?
On the two latter of these arguments little stress can be laid. The
mention of the Christians under their proper name in the Neronian
persecution, by a writer who lived nearly fifty years afterwards, can
INTRODUCTION.
hardly be taken as a proof that in the reign of Nero the Christians
were already looked upon as a distinct body from the Jews ; still
less can the further deduction be admitted that they could not have
been so regarded at Kome, unless they had been of Gentile origin.
In reference to the second argument from the comparison of the last
chapter of the Acts, it may be observed, that to assume a fact in
order to reconcile a discrepancy between two writers is an extremely
precarious mode of reasoning " it must be so, not because either the
Acts or the Epistle says so, but because otherwise there will be a dis
agreement between them." These circuitous reconcilements do more
than discrepancies to sap the historical foundations of Christianity.
In the present instance, even after the assumption of Olshausen,
the difficulty remains nearly where it was. It is singular, though
not perhaps impossible, that the Jews should know nothing of the
Christians residing in the same city ; whether the latter are Jews or
Gentiles makes little difference. These arguments, however, are not
the real strength of Neander s case. Their weakness cannot invali
date the express statement of St. Paul, that he is writing to Gen
tiles ; and by Gentiles he could never have meant Jews. When he
says that he longed to see them, that he might have fruit among them,
even as "among other Gentiles" (i. 13.), or that he "had received
grace and Apostleship for obedience to the faith among all the Gen
tiles for his name, among whom are ye also the called of Jesus
Christ " (ver. 5, 6.), we are no longer resting on doubtful inferences,
but on the express language of the Apostle himself.
2. On the other hand, a strong case may be made out from the
Epistle itself in proof of the position that it was written not for
Gentiles, but for Jews. The critic by whom this view of the subject
has been most ably maintained is Baur of Tubingen. The Epistle
to the Romans, he argues, like all the other Epistles, must have
arisen out of circumstances. There must have been something
personal and occasional, which might naturally furnish the subject
of a letter. But the whole Epistle would have the vaguest possible
connexion with those to whom it was addressed, if it was written to
10 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
a Gentile Church. How inappropriate, how discouraging, to be
perpetually reminding them that the Jews were first called, after
wards the Gentiles ; how unlike the manner of him who was " all
things to all men ! " What interest could the question of the resto
ration of the Jews have for Gentiles ? We do not naturally express
passion to those who do not themselves feel it, nor would the
Apostle have poured forth his " heart s desire for Israel," in a strain
like that of the Psalmist, " if I forget thee, Jerusalem," to cold and
uninterested listeners.
The minute references throughout the Epistle to the Law and the
Prophets may be taken as a further proof that the Apostle is speaking
to Jews. We can scarcely imagine a Gentile Church so completely
passing over into the Jewish point of view as to recognise in the
Gospel a fulfilment of promises made to the Patriarchs, of whose very
names a few years previous they had been ignorant. The argument
of the seventh chapter of the Romans seems to presuppose not only a
passing knowledge of the writers of the Old Testament, but a sort
of traditional acquaintance with it, and experience of its practical
influence. How could those who, a few years before, had not even
heard of the Law, be now feeling it as a burden on the conscience ?
Though, as Baur admits, the Apostle in addressing Gentiles does
sometimes use illustrations from the Prophets; that is, speaks to them
from what we should conceive to have been his point of view
rather than theirs, this is very different from the use of the Law in
the Epistle to the Romans, which carries us into another world, and
presupposes states of mind and feelings common to the Apostle and
those to whom he is writing, which are inconceivable in Gentiles.
Unless he is using unmeaning words to them, they must be supposed
to have had a minute verbal acquaintance with the Law and the
Prophets ; and even with the text of the LXX.
But if we can assume that we are addressing a Jewish community,
we have only to invert the order of the Epistle to find an appropriate
meaning and occasion for it. St. Paul has begun with the universal
principle, righteousness by faith without the deeds of the Law ; ad-
INTRODUCTION. 11
mission of Jew and Gentile alike to the communion and fellowship
of Christ. But what in writing to the Jewish Roman Church was
nearest his heart, was not the admission of the Gentiles, but the
restoration of the Jews. The offer of salvation, through Christ, was
made to the Jew first, and afterwards to the Gentile ; yet facts
seemed, as it were, to disprove this, for the Jews were being rejected
and the Gentiles received. With strange feelings the early Jewish
Church must have watched the glory departing from their race, and
the door of the tabernacle opening ever wider for the admission of
the Gentiles. Some, perhaps, there were who acknowledged that the
hand of God was against them ; others, possibly, like the author of
the Hebrews, acquiesced in the spiritual meaning of the tabernacle
and the sacrifices ; few, if any, like St. Paul, were ready to acknow
ledge that God was the God of the Gentiles equally with the Jews.
To minds in such a state as this, St. Paul seeks to justify the ways of
God, not so much by an appeal to the eternal principles of truth and
justice, as by the language of the Old Testament, and the analogy of
God s dealings with the chosen people.
The arguments that he uses to them are twofold. First, that the
Jews are rejected by their own fault; and, secondly, that their re
jection was just like the punishment of their fathers. It is singular,
that throughout the Prophets we have the double consciousness ;
first, that they are the chosen people of God, and also (as it has
been expressed) that " they were never good for much at any time."
The same double consciousness is traceable in the Epistle to the
Romans, especially in the tenth and eleventh chapters. To make his
view appear reasonable to them, the Apostle enters into the depth
of the mystery, which aforetime had not been revealed. Without
going into the whole scheme of Divine Providence, they could neither
comprehend the reason for the rejection of their brethren nor the hope
of their restoration. They must begin by acknowledging that God
had superseded the Law, or they could not possibly understand how
their brethren could be punished for holding fast to it. The latter
had gone the wrong way, seeking to establish their own righteousness,
12 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
and had missed salvation. It was a necessary consequence of a new
revelation being given, that those who did not receive it were ex
cluded from its benefits. And yet, when it was remembered that
that revelation was a revelation of mercy; that the Jews were re
jected not to narrow, but to widen, the way of salvation ; there
might seem to be a good hope that mercy would yet rejoice against
judgment, and the way be made wider still for Jew as well as
Gentile to enter in. "And so God concluded all under sin that he
might have mercy upon all."
In such a view of the Epistle it may be remarked that there is an
analogy between St. Paul s treatment of the case of the individual
believer and that of the Jewish people. The believer must first be
made conscious of his sin before he can receive the gift of grace ; so
the Jewish nation must be rejected before it can be received ; and
the believing Jew be made sensible that the Law has passed away
before he can see the hope of his countrymen s restoration. He who
has begun the good work will carry it on to the end. He who gave
his Son to die for mankind, while yet sinners, how shall He not,
when they are now reconciled, freely give them all things ? He
who inverted his natural order, and placed the Gentile before the
Jew, shall He not much more restore the Jew to his original pri
vileges ?
A few other points may be adduced in support of Baur s views.
Such are the inculcation of obedience to the powers that be, in the
xiiith chapter, which may be thought to be more appropriate to a
Jewish than a Gentile Church. In a Jewish community only
should we be likely to find the " fifth-monarchy " men of that day,
whether zealots for the Law or expectants of a Messiah s kingdom.
Gentile Christians we might expect rather to present the innocent,
peaceful image which we gather of the believers from Pliny s
letters, who could have needed no such warning. A further indica
tion which may be thought to connect the Epistle in the same
manner with a Jewish rather than a Gentile Church, is the allusion
INTRODUCTION. 13
to the scruple respecting meats and drinks, and the opinions on the
observance of days.
When weighed in the scales of criticism, it must be admitted that
much stress cannot be laid on the two last arguments. The utmost
we can concede to them is, that the allusions referred to in the
Epistle agree rather better with the hypothesis of a Jewish than of
a Gentile community. Yet more shadowy seem the proofs derived
from the Clementine Homilies and the Shepherd of Hernias ; which,
even if it be granted that they were written by members of the
Roman Church, yet, being the work of a century later and appearing
in a time of transition, cannot be adduced to support the view that
the first believers at Rome were Jews, still less that the earliest
spirit of the Roman Church was of a Jewish Gnostic character.
Omitting then, on either side, the weaker arguments, and confining
ourselves to strong and simple grounds, we seem at first sight to come
to two utterly irreconcilable and contradictory views : the Epistle
was addressed to Gentiles, because St. Paul expressly says so ; the
Epistle was addressed to Jews, because its contents are suited only
to a Jewish habit of thought and education. Our object must now
be to find some middle term which will reconcile the two opposing
theories, which will admit of the Roman Church being partly
Jewish and partly Gentile, or, in a certain sense, Jewish, in another,
Gentile.
The old belief was, that the Roman Church consisted partly of
Jews and partly of Gentiles, and that the Epistle was written with
the intention of adjusting the disputes that had arisen between them.
The latter part of this statement finds no support from the Epistle
itself, and appears to be nothing more than an arbitrary assumption
suggested by the analogy of the Corinthians and the Galatians.
The former part need not be wholly denied : for in every
Christian Church there were probably some Jews and some Gentiles.
Yet it does not follow from this that the community was divided be
tween them, or that both were numerous enough to form separate
14 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
parties. The Epistle affords no intimation of such parties existing
side by side, whether peaceably or otherwise, in the Roman commu
nion. St. Paul never speaks of Jew and Gentile as in actual contact,
disputing about circumcision, or purification, or meats and drinks,
or sabbath days. The relation which he supposes between them is
wholly ideal ; that is, in the purposes of God, not in their assemblies
or daily life. They divide the world and time ; they have nothing
to do with each other as individuals. Nor does the theory that the
Roman Church was a half Jewish, half Gentile community agree
with either of the facts stated above the fact that the name
Gentiles is applied to all, while the tone and style of the Epistle are
wholly Jewish.
It is more reasonable, as well as far more in accordance with the
indications of the Epistles, to regard the Churches planted by the
Apostles, not as divided into two sections of Jew and Gentile,
circumcision and uncircumcision, but as always in a state of trans
ition between the two, dropping gradually their Jewish customs,
and opening the door wider and wider to their Gentile brethren,
slowly, but at length entirely, convinced that it was not "at
this time the kingdom was to be restored to Israel." Such must,
at any rate, have been the case with the Churches not founded
by St. Paul. It was long ere the curtains of the tabernacle were
drawn aside, or the veil rent in twain, or the earthly and visible
temple exchanged for that building in the heavens, the house not
made with hands. Disputes about the outward rite of circumcision
would be succeeded by another stage of controversy respecting the
inward obligation of the Law on the conscience, and the authority of
St. Paul and the Twelve. There were cases, also, in which an
idealised or Alexandrianised Judaism had been the soil in which the
Gospel was originally planted. Here the transition would be more
rapid ; the faith of the earliest believers would linger less around the
weak and beggarly elements ; they would more easily harmonise the
old and new ; they would more readily comprehend the length and
breadth of the purposes of God. The change required of them
INTRODUCTION. 15
would be in their ways of thought rather than in their habits of life ;
and the latitude which such converts allowed themselves would
react on the stricter Jewish communities.
Changes like these may be supposed to have been passing over the
Roman Church. At the time St. Paul wrote to them, there was no
question of circumcision ; that, if it had ever been, was now left be
hind. But in a more general way the same difficulty still pressed upon
them. What was the obligation of the Law? And, as they looked
upon the passing scene, and saw the chosen race becoming a spectacle
to the world, to angels, and to men, they could not but ask also,
" What God intended respecting it ? " Whether were they to melt
away among the Gentiles, or to preserve their name and heritage ?
While men were pondering such thoughts in their hearts, of the
Law and its sabbaths, and ceremonies, and sacrifices, of the con
solation of Israel, and the restoration of the kingdom, we may con
ceive the Apostle to have written this Epistle with a view of meeting
their doubts, and adjusting their thoughts, and vindicating the ways
of God to man, and revealing the way of salvation. He gave them
the full truth for the half-truth, the day for the twilight, and es
tablished their faith in Christ, not by drawing back, but by going
further than they had imagined, and resting the Gospel on an immu
table moral foundation (Rom. ii. 11. ; iii. 29).
Such we conceive to have been the state of feeling in the Roman
Church, because such is the state of feeling to which the words of
the Apostle are appropriate. Neither the earlier one, in which
men said, " except ye be circumcised ye cannot be saved," and an
Apostle himself withdrew and refused to eat with the Gentiles ; nor
the later one, in r which it was clearly understood that all such
differences were done away in Christ, are suitable to the argument
of the Epistle to the Romans. The Apostle was still seeking to
teach a Jewish Church the great lesson of the admission of the
Gentiles more perfectly. So far the hypothesis of Baur affords a
good key to the interpretation of the Epistle. But still the ex
pression in the fifth verse of the first chapter has not been disposed
16 EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
of. In what sense could they be said to be Gentiles ? For sup
posing the Roman Church to have consisted of Jews gradually passing
into the state of Gentiles, we have an explanation of the frequent
dwelling on the Law, and the relation of Jew and Gentile, but none
of the term, " other Gentiles," under which the Apostle comprehends
them. No gradual change in their opinions and circumstances could
have justified him in calling those Gentiles who were originally Jews.
Nor, however much he might " magnify his office," would he have
included the chosen people under the common name, which he every
where opposed to them. The very meaning of the Apostle of the
Gentiles would have been lost had the term " nations " extended
itself to them.
The attempt to solve this difficulty runs up into the general
question of the state and circumstances of the early Church : our
inquiry respecting which must, however, be restricted to the single
point which bears upon the present subject ; viz. how far the
Gentile Churches were originally in feeling Jewish, -whether to the
Gentiles also the gate of the New Testament was through the Old ?
For if it could be shown that Jewish and Gentile Christianity were
not so much opposed as successive that the Gospel of the
Jewish Apostles was the first, and that of St. Paul the subsequent,
stage in the history of the Apostolic Church, then the difficulty of
itself disappears, and the double aspect of the Epistle to the
Romans is what we should expect. .
Our conception of the Apostolical age is necessarily based on the
Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of St. Paul. It is in vain to
search ecclesiastical writings for further information ; the pages of
Justin and Irenaeus supply only the evidence of their own defi
ciency. Confining ourselves, then, to the original sources, we cannot
but be struck by the fact, that of the first eighteen years after the
day of Pentecost, hardly any account is preserved to us in the Acts,
and that to this scanty record no addition can be made from the
Epistles of St. Paul. Isolated facts are narrated, but not events in
their order and sequence : there is no general prospect of the Chris-
INTRODUCTION. 17
tian world. Churches are growing up every where : some the
result of missions from Jerusalem, others of unknown origin ; yet
none of them standing in any definite relation to the Apostles of the
circumcision. It seems as if we had already reached the second
stage in the history of the Apostolic Church, without any precise
knowledge of the first. That second period, if we terminate it with
the supposed date of the Apostle s death, extends over about fourteen
or fifteen years, years full of life, and growth, and vicissitude.
Could the preceding period have been less so, or does it only appear
to be so from the silence of history ? Is it according to the analogy
of human things, or of the workings of Divine power in the soul
of man, that during the first part of its existence, Christianity
should have slumbered, and after fifteen years of inaction have sud
denly gone forth to conquer the world ? Or, are we falling under
that common historical illusion, that little happened in a time of
which we know little ?
And yet how are we to supply this lost history out of the single
verse of the Acts (xi. 19.), " They which were scattered abroad upon
the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice
and Cyprus and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the
Jews only." What reply is to be made to the inquiry respecting
the origin of the Christian Church in the two cities which in after-
ages were to exercise the greatest influence on its history, Alex
andria and Rome? We cannot tell. Our slender materials only
admit of being eked out by some general facts which do not fill up
the void of details, but are of the greatest importance in illustrating
the spirit and character of the earliest Christian communities.
Foremost among these facts is the dispersion of the Jews. The
remark has been often made that the universality of the Roman
Empire was itself a preparation for the universality of the Gospel,
its very organisation throughout the world being the image, as it
may have been the model, of the external form of the Christian
Church. But not less striking as an image of the external state of
the earliest Christian communion is the dispersion of the ten tribes
VOL. II. C
18 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
throughout the world, and not less worthy of observation as it was
an inward preparation for Christianity is the universal diffusion
of that religion, the spirit of which seemed at the time to be most
narrow and contracted within itself, and at first sight most hostile
to the whole human race. Of all religions in the world it was pro
bably the only one capable of making proselytes, which had the force,
as it had the will, to draw men within its circle. Literally, and not
only in idea, " the Law was a schoolmaster to bring men to Christ."
The compassing sea and land " to make one proselyte " was not
without its results. Seneca, who did not know, or at least has not
told anything of the Christians, says of the Jews, "Victoribus victi
leges dederunt." The Roman satirists were aware of their festivals,
and speak of them in a way which implies not only converts to
Judaism, but a degree of regard for their opinions. They had
passed into a proverb in Horace s time for their zeal in bringing men
over to their opinions. (1 Sat. iv. 143.) Philo mentions the suburb
beyond the Tiber in which they were domiciled by Augustus, the
greater number of the inhabitants of which are said to have been
freedmen : Leg. ad Caium, 23. Tacitus s account of their origin
is perhaps an unique attempt in a Roman writer to investigate the
religious antiquities of an Eastern people, implying of itself, what
it also explicitly states, the tendency towards them. No other
religion had been sustained for centuries by contributions from the
most remote parts of the empire to a common centre ; contributions
the very magnitude of which is ascribed to the zeal of numerous
converts. (Tacitus, Hist. v. 5. ; Cicero pro Flacco, c. 28.) According
to Josephus, whole tribes in the neighbourhood of Judea had sub
mitted to the rite of circumcision. (Ant. xiii. 9. 1. ; 11. 3. ; 15. 4.)
The women of Damascus in particular are mentioned as not trusted
by their husbands in a massacre of the Jews, because they were
favourable to the Jews religion." The Jews in Alexandria
occupied two of the five quarters into which the city was divided :
and the whole Jewish population of Egypt was rated by Philo at
a million. Facts like these speak volumes for the importance and
influence of the Jews.
INTRODUCTION. 19
In one sense it is true that the Jewish religion seemed already
about to expire. To us, looking back from the vantage ground of
the Gospel, nothing is clearer than that it contained within itself
the seeds of its own destruction. " The Law and the Prophets were
until John, and now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and
the violent take it by force." Before Christ after Christ this is
the great landmark that divides Judaism from Christianity, while
for a few years longer the devoted nation, already within the coils
of its own destiny, lingers about its ancient seat. It was otherwise
to its contemporaries. To them the Jewish people was not declining,
but growing. There seemed to be no end to its wealth and influ
ence. The least of all peoples in itself, it was a nation within a
nation in every city. In the wreck of the heathen religions,
Judaism alone remained unchanged. Nor is there anything strange
in its retaining undiminished this power over the human mind,
when its own national glory had already departed. Its objects
of faith were not lessened, but magnified by distance. It contained
in itself that inward life which other religions were seeking for, and
for the want of which they expired. It could not but communicate
to others the belief in the unity of God, which had sunk for ages
into the heart of the race ; to the educated Greek " one guess
among many," to the Israelite a necessary truth. It formed a sort
of meeting point of East and West, which in the movement of
either towards the other naturally exercised a singular influence.
Many elements of Greek cultivation had insensibly passed into the
mind of the Jewish people, as of other Asiatic nations, before the
reaction of the Macc abean w"ars ; cities with Greek names covered
the land : even after that time the rugged Hebrew feeling was
confined within narrow limits. The Gospel as it passed from the
lips of our Lord and the Twelve had not far to go in Palestine itself
before it came in contact with the Greek world. In other countries
the diffusion of the Greek Version of the Old Testament is a proof
that a Hellenised Judaism was growing up everywhere. The
Alexandrian philosophy offered a link with heathen literature and
c 2
20 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
mythology. Judaism was no longer isolated but wandering far
and wide. Clinging to its belief in Jehovah and abating nothing
of its national pride, it was nevertheless capable of assuming to
itself new phases without losing its essential character, of dropping
its more repulsive features and entering into and penetrating the
better heathen mind both of East and West.
The heads of many subjects of inquiry are summed up in these re
flections, which lead us round to the question from which we started,
" Whether to the Gentiles also the gate of the New Testament was
through the Old?" And they suggest the answer to the question,
that " so it was," not because the minds of the first teachers were
unable to rise above the "rudiments of the Law," but because the
soil for Christianity among the Gentiles was itself prepared in
Judaism. It was the natural growth of the Gospel in the world
as it then was. The better life of the Jewish people passed into the
earliest Christian Church; the meaning of prophecy was lost to
the Jew and found to the believer in Christ. And the facts re
corded in the Acts of the Apostles represent the outward side of
this inward tendency : it was the Jewish proselyte who commonly
became the Christian convert. Such were Cornelius and the Ethi
opian eunuch, and the deputy Sergius Paulus, who "of his own
accord desired to hear the word of God." The teachers themselves
wore the habit of Jews, and they came appealing to the authority
of the Old Testament. That garb and form and manner which we
insensibly drop in thinking of the early teachers of Christianity,
could not have failed to impress its Jewish character on their first
hearers. It would be their first conception of the Gospel, that it
was a kind of Judaism to which they were predisposed by the
same kind of feelings which led them towards Judaism itself.
The question receives the same answer when reconsidered from
another point of view, in connexion with the general narrative of
the first propagation of the Gospel, in the Acts and the Epistles of
St. Paul. Read them on any other hypothesis and they become
unintelligible. For they imply that there was a time when the
INTRODUCTION. 21
Gospel was preached to Jews only, when the disciples were not
called Christians, if indeed they ever were so at Jerusalem, when
the preaching of the truth was mainly in the hands of the Apostles
of the circumcision. They imply further, that another Gospel
was taught by the Apostle St. Paul, yet still taught through the
Old Testament, to those who heard and desired to be under the Law ;
often with doubtful success, so widely spread and deeply rooted
were the doctrines of the circumcision, so strong the tendency to
relapse into them. Only at Lystra in Lycaonia, and at Athens, the
Apostle appears to have preached, with what result the narrative
of the Acts does not clearly inform us, to pure heathens. And it
is remarkable as falling in with these facts, that in some of the
Epistles, as, for example, the Thessalonians and Galatians, we are in
a degree of uncertainty whether the persons to whom the Apostle is
writing are Jewish or Gentile converts.
The earlier Jewish aspect of Christianity has passed away, now
that we are dead to the Law. We can scarcely imagine a time when
all the heathen converts were in the position of proselytes of the gate,
the only question being, whether they were to proceed to the further
stage of initiation into Judaism and become proselytes of righte
ousness. We cannot conceive the feelings with which the Old
Testament was regarded by those to whom it was not only half, but
the whole of the word of God, to whom the danger was not that
they would reject it, but that they would remain too exclusively
within its circle. Numberless as are the indications of Judaising
tendencies in the Epistles, no vestige is discernible of any repug
nance to the Mosaical law, or any unwillingness to admit its
Divine authority. Such feelings of antagonism to the Law as are
observable in Marcion and some of the early heretics, do not belong
to the Apostolical age. St. Paul does not hold the balance between
those who gave it too much and too little honour ; he himself is the
centre of the opposition to it ; few probably went as far in the same
direction. The weight and sacredness of the Apostle s name were
not to the rebellious Corinthians or Galatians what they are to us.
c 3
22 EPISTLE TO THE EOMANS.
Nor must his influence on the Jewish Christian Church be measured
by the proportion which his writings bear to the rest of the New
Testament or their effect upon the world in after ages. Those are
mournful words which he utters at the end of his life (2 Tim. i. 15.),
Thou knowest that all they which are in Asia are turned away
from me."
But besides the constant tendency of the converts to relapse into
Judaism, the manner in which the Apostle argues with them out of
the Old Testament in four at least of his Epistles, as well as in the
greater number of his discourses in the Acts, is a further
evidence of the close historical connexion between Judaism
and the Gospel. Such appeals, it will be readily acknowledged,
imply a profound faith in the Apostle s mind, in the Divine
origin of the religion of his fathers, which in another point of view
he yet regards as the "weak and beggarly elements," nay, even
as " the strength of sin." But more than this, they imply also the
certainty that those to whom he was writing would understand the
force of his appeals. For we cannot suppose that the Apostle, in
quoting texts out of the Law, was uttering unmeaning sounds, was
speaking from his own mind what was unintelligible to those whom
he is addressing. Without one word of preface or explanation, he
repeats again and again the language of the Old Testament, the very
sacredness of which consisted in the familiarity of its sound, the
point of which lay in the novelty and spirituality of the interpreta
tion given to it. Must he not be speaking to those who lived in the
same world with himself, who, like Timothy, had long known the
Holy Scriptures, who were brought up in the same traditions, and in
all points circumcision only excepted though Gentiles in name
and origin, were really Jews.
Now if the history of Judaism in the Augustan age, no less than
the indications of the New Testament itself, leads to the inference
that the first disciples, even in Gentile cities, were commonly Jewish
converts, or, at any rate, such as were acquainted with the Law
and the Prophets, and were disposed to receive with reverence
Jewish teachers, the difficulty in the Epistle to the Romans is solved,
INTRODUCTION. 23
at the same time that the fact of its solution is an additional confirm
ation of the view which has been just taken. The Roman Church
appeared to be at once Jewish and Gentile; Jewish in feeling,
Gentile in origin. Jewish, because the Apostle everywhere argues
with them as Jews ; Gentile, because he expressly addresses them
by name as such. In this double fact there is now seen to be no
thing strange or anomalous: it typifies the general condition of
Christian Churches, whether Jewish or Gentile ; whether founded
by St. Paul, or by the Apostles of the circumcision. It was not
only in idea that the Old Testament prepared the way for the New,
by holding up the truth of the unity of God ; but the spread of
that truth among the Gentiles, and the influence of the Jewish
Scriptures, were themselves actual preparatives for the Gospel.
To those who were Gentiles by birth, but had received the Gospel
originally from Jewish teachers, the subject of the Epistle to the
Romans would have a peculiar interest. It expressed the truth on
the verge of which they stood, which seemed to be peculiarly re
quired by their own circumstances, which explained their position
to themselves. It purged the film from their eyes, which prevented
them from seeing the way of God perfectly. Hitherto they had
acquiesced in the position which public opinion among the heathen
assigned to them, that they were a Jewish sect : and they had
implicitly followed the lives as well as the lessons of their first
instructors in Christ. But a nobler truth was now to break upon
them. God was not the God of the Jews only, but of the Gentiles
also. And this wider range of vision involved a new principle, not
the Law, but faith. If nations of every language and tongue were
to be included in the Gospel dispensation, barbarian, Scythian,
bond and free, the principle that was to unite them must be supe
rior to the differences that separated them. In other words, it
could not be an institution or a Church, but an inward principle,
which might belong alike to all mankind. This principle was faith,
the view of which in St. Paul s mind is never separated from the
redemption of mankind at large.
c 4
24 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
It may be remarked, as confirmatory of what lias been said, that
no allusion occurs in the Epistle to the Romans to the question of
circumcision. There could hardly have failed to have been such
allusions had the Church been divided between two parties of Jew
and Gentile, or had it been originally a Jewish Church ever open
ing the door wider to the Gentiles. The absence of such allusions
is, however, perfectly consistent with the fact that it was addressed
to a community, the majority of whose members had not undergone
the rite of circumcision.
The reference to disputes respecting meats and drinks, and the
whole aspect of the Law as a burden on the conscience, would have
at least as much meaning to Gentiles against their nature brought
up in its observance as to Jews themselves. The burden which
neither the Jews of that day nor their fathers were able to bear,
would be still heavier, more unmeaning, and more perplexing, when
pressing upon the necks of Gentiles. They would at once under
stand the Apostle s reasoning respecting it, and at the same time
their own admission to the privileges of the Gospel would be the
highest internal witness to the truth which he taught. What they
knew and felt respecting themselves, they would know and feel also
was the grace of God to all mankind. Christian humility, as well
as Christian charity, was ready to assent to the universal redemption
of all nations. And, as in the alternations of thought, they came
round to the case of the Jew, they would sympathise with St. Paul s
feelings, as, if not Israelites themselves, having received the Gospel
from Israelites.
As a test of the above argument, it is thought desirable to bring
together before the reader, in one view, the passages in the Epistle
which throw a light on the state of the Roman Church.
Chap. i. 5. By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for
obedience to the faith among all Gentiles, for his name. Among whom
are ye also the called of Jesus Christ.
14. That I might have fruit among you also, as among other
Gentiles.
INTRODUCTION. 25
16. For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ : for it is the
power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth ; to the Jew
first, and also to the Gentile.
The two first are the passages alluded to in the preceding Essay,
which make it impossible for us to suppose that the Epistle to the
Romans was addressed to a purely Jewish Church.
The third may seem to warrant no inference. Yet it is improbable
that a writer of such tact as St. Paul would have placed in the fore
ground of his Epistle the announcement " to the Jew first, and also to
the Gentile," had he been writing to a purely Gentile Church, or to
one unable to enter into the privileges of the Jew. Comp. c. ii. 9, 10. ;
also, ii. 14. " For when the Gentiles, which have not the Law, do by
nature the things contained in the Law, these, not having the Law,
are a Law unto themselves." The Gentiles are here spoken of in the
third person, as at c. iii. 1. the Jews. There was nothing in the
doctrine here laid down, any more than in the words of our Saviour,
" Many shall come from the east and west," which was new to the
Jews, who, as appears from Philo, acknowledged that the sinful Jew
would be condemned by the believing Gentile.
Chap. ii. 1. 17. "Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever
thou art," &c. " But if thou art called a Jew and restest in the Law
and makest thy boast of God," &c. Among the slighter indications of
the truth of the view urged above, may be mentioned the more covert
way in which the Jew is attacked in comparison with the Gentile.
In the latter part of the chapter, St. Paul is not immediately ad
dressing the Roman Church, but speaking of Judaism in the
abstract.
Chap. iii. 1 17. This passage is so full of quotations from the
Old Testament, and has a tone of thought so peculiar, that it is impos
sible to suppose it would have been addressed to those who had not
received a Jewish education. Is it likely that a Gentile convert
would have understood that peculiar Jewish difficulty respecting the
ways of God to man ? See notes and introduction to c. iii.
19. " Whatsoever things the Law saith, it saith to them that are
26 EPISTLE TO "THE ROMANS.
under the law." It has ever been a difficulty with commentators on
this passage, how St. Paul could have brought Gentile as well as Jew
under the imprecations of the Law. The true point of this difficulty
seems to be, not that it is an unfair argument to apply passages of
the Old Testament to a use for which they were not at first ap
parently intended (for this we must grant to be the case with regard
to many other of St. Paul s quotations), but that the Gentile should
have been brought to admit that they were applicable to his case.
But if we try to put ourselves in the position of a Gentile who had
received the Gospel at the hands of Jews, who had been accustomed
to appropriate to himself the words of the Law, the difficulty dis
appears. The Law was a witness that the Gentile who had received
a Jewish education would be no more disposed to reject than the
Jew himself.
21. But now the righteousness of God without the Law is mani
fested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets.
Chap. iv. The argument from Abraham and David, familiar to
the Jew, would be unintelligible to Gentile Christians.
Chap. v. affords another instance of the intimate acquaintance
with the Old Testament, presupposed in those whom the Apostle is
addressing.
Chap. vii. The same acquaintance with the Law is implied in
the instance of the woman who has lost her husband ; as is also
a practical experience of its influence on the human heart, in the
latter part of the chapter.
Chap. ix. xi. are almost entirely based on the words of the pro
phets, and the analogy of God s dealings with the Jews. No Gentile
Christian could have taken the warm interest in the subject of these
chapters, which is evidently required by the interest St. Paul him
self exhibits in them. St. Paul is at first earnest to prove that the
Jews are rejected, and then, again, that they are restored. Neither
the first nor the last would seem an appropriate theme if addressed
to Gentiles.
Chap. xi. 13. "For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the
INTRODUCTION. 27
Apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office." St. Paul is not in
these words addressing the Roman Church, but apostrophising the
Gentile, as at ii. 17. the Jew.
Chap. xiii. 1. Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers
For there is no power but of God : the powers that be are ordained
of God.
Chap, xiv. 1. Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to
doubtful disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things 5
another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
5. One man esteemeth one day above another ; another esteemeth
every day alike.
14. I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that there is
nothing unclean of itself.
Chap. xv. 8. Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the
circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to
the fathers. And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy;
as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the
Gentiles, and sing unto thy people.
15. I have written the more boldly unto you in some sort, as
putting you in mind, because of the grace that is given unto me.
16. That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles,
ministering the Gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles
might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.
20. Yea, so have I strived to preach the Gospel, not where Christ
was named, lest I should build upon another man s foundation.
Chap. xvi. Out of twenty-four names of persons who are sa
luted, only one, Mary, is a Jewish name.
3. 5. Greet Priscilla and Aquila, and the Church that is in their
house.
The above passages imply, that the persons addressed were
Gentiles, on whom, as the Apostle of the Gentiles, St. Paul had
a claim, who were, however, converted by others, and therefore
occasioned the Apostle a delicacy in extending his sphere of
labour to them. They were intimately acquainted with, and
28 EPISTLE TO THE EOMANS.
capable of being convinced by arguments from, the Law ; they were
apparently, though Gentiles, ignorant of God s purposes to the
Gentile world at large, and they were capable of feeling an interest
in the future fortunes of the Jewish people. They were scrupulous
about meats and drinks, and a lengthened admonition to obey the
powers that were was not considered by the Apostle as inappro
priate or superfluous. All these facts no other theory seems ade
quate to explain, but the one here offered, that they were a Gentile
Church but Jewish converts, a theory which is supported by the
reason of the thing, as well as by the analogy of other Christian
communities.
29
SUBJECT OF THE EPISTLE.
THE Gentile origin and Jewish character of the Roman Church are
a sufficient explanation of the style and subject of the Epistle to the
Romans. The condemnation of the Jew first, and afterwards of the
Gentile, the justification of the Jew first, and afterwards of the
Gentile, the actual fact of the rejection of the Jews, and the hope
of their restoration, are all of them topics appropriate to what we
may conceive to have been the feeling of the Roman converts, in
whom a Jewish education had not obliterated a Gentile origin, and
whom a Gentile origin did not deprive of the hope of Jewish pro
mises. The Apostle no longer appears to be speaking to the winds
of heaven, what, after being borne to and fro upon the earth,, might
return to the profit of the Church after many days, but what had
an immediate interest for it, and arose naturally out of its actual
state.
Assuming the results of the preceding essay, we may consider the
structure of the Epistle, with the view of tracing the relation of the
parts to each other and to the whole. What was primary, what
secondary, in the Apostle s thoughts ? Is the order of the compo
sition the same as the order of ideas ? Do we proceed from without
inwards, that is, from the admission of the Gentiles to the justifica
tion of the individual believer ? or from within outwards, that is,
from the individual believer to the world at large ? Is the episode
of the restoration of the Jews subordinate or principal, a correction
of the first part of the Epistle, or, as Baur supposes, the kernel of
the whole ? These are subtle and delicate inquiries, respecting which
it is not possible to attain absolute certainty, and in the prosecution
of which we are always in danger of attributing to the Apostle more
30 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
of method and plan than he really had. Such inquiries can only be
made by a comparison of other writings of the Apostle, and an
accurate examination of the Epistle itself.
We may begin by asking, " Whether there is any subject which
the Epistle to the Romans has in common with the other Epistles,
which is specially identified with the life and working of the
Apostle ? " There is. While the doctrine of righteousness by faith
without the deeds of the Law is but slightly referred to in the other
Epistles of St. Paul, and is but once mentioned in the Acts of the
Apostles, there is another truth, which is everywhere and at all
times insisted upon by him, and everywhere connected with his
name, which recurs in almost every one of his Epistles, and is
everywhere dwelt upon in the Acts as the result of his Apostleship,
the admission of the Gentiles. He speaks of himself, and is always
spoken of, as the Apostle of the Gentiles ; his conversion itself is
bound up with this labour of universal love ; in " the beginning of
the Gospel " he stands up for their rights, among " the Apostles
that were before him ; " all through his life he is proclaiming in
a more or less spiritual manner, " God hath made of one blood
all nations of the earth." (Acts, xvii. 26.) " Is he the God of the
Jews only, is he not also of the Gentiles ? " (Rom. iii. 29.) All
are one in Christ, in whom " neither circumcision nor uncircumcision
avail anything, but a new creature" (Gal. iii. 28., vi. 15.); or,
according to another form of expression, " in whose circumcision
the Gentiles also are circumcised." (Col. ii. 11.) Compare 1 Cor.
xii. 13. ; Eph. i. 10., iii. 36.
Such repeated reference to the same subject justifies our regarding
it as the leading thought of the Apostle s mind, the great truth
which the power of God had inspired him to teach. Yet, itself
had a twofold aspect, for the differences of Jew and Gentile were
done away with, not on the ground of any abstract equality of the
human race in the sight of God, but as they became one in Christ.
It is union with Christ which breaks through all other ties of race
and language, and knits men together into a new body which is His
SUBJECT OF THE EriSTLE. 31
Church. So while looking at the external world we seem almost at
once to pass inward, and to blend the assertion of the general prin
ciple with the experience of the individual soul. The chord of
love which encircles all men has its beginning too in the believer s
heart. " There is neither barbarian nor Scythian, bond nor free,"
not on any speculative grounds of morality, but because his own
spiritual instinct tells him that all these differences are done away
in Christ.
But with this outward aspect of Christianity is connected also
another thought, which follows it as the shadow does the light, " the
times of that ignorance which God winked at," " the passing by of
past sins " (Rom. iii. 25.), " which was kept secret since the world
began " (Rom. xvi. 25.), "which in other ages was not made known
that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, and of the same body "
(Eph. iii. 6.). It was strange to look at the world around, and see
the Gentiles also pressing into the Kingdom of Heaven. But it was
not less, but perhaps even more strange, to think of the Gentiles
in past times who seemed to have so little relation to the God
who made them ; in the world of darkness and silence, on which
the eye could rest, but which it could not pierce. Nor was the same
thought inapplicable to those who were under the Law. They too,
though with many " advantages," were still subject to ordinances,
shut up in prison until the time appointed. The prior states of
Jew and Gentile were not wholly dissimilar : the Law was the glass
which might be held up to both to convict them of sin ; in which,
world within world, mirror within mirror, the Jew was first seen,
afterwards the Gentile. Jew and Gentile, the times before and the
times after, are the outlines or divisions of the book in the volume of
which are contained the purposes of God.
Such is the external aspect of the Apostle s teaching so far
as it can be separated from the inward life, which penetrates
the individual and the Church alike. But there is a world
within as well as a world without, nor can we view one except
through the medium of the other. The knowledge which the
32 EPJSTLE TO THE ROMANS.
Apostle himself has of the works of God, is transferred to the
heathen ; the consciousness which he feels of his own union with
Christ is the living proof of the acceptance of all mankind; the re
membrance of his struggle under the Law, is the image of the state
of those under the Law. Though the thought comes upon him daily
of his mission to the Gentiles everywhere, he does not look upon
them as they appear in the pages of ancient authors, or on their
modes of worship, as they present themselves to the student of
mythology. He is not writing a philosophy of history, but a re
ligion of history. He does not, in modern phraseology, put himself
in the position of the heathen, or even of the Jew, but retains his
own. Nor must we, in our interpretation of the Epistle, endeavour
to force his words, from this simple and natural point of view, into
one more in accordance with our tastes and feelings.
An illustration from heathen philosophy may serve to indicate
the peculiar nature of this transition from the individual mind to
the world at large. All modern commentators on Plato admit that
in the Republic the individual and the state pass into one another.
The virtues, duties, distinctions of one are also those of the other ;
the consideration of tlie one seems to lead the philosopher on to the
deeper and more enlarged consideration of the other. Not alto
gether unlike this is the manner in which the individual conscience
in the Epistles of St. Paul is the reflection not only of itself, but of
the world at large ; and in which the thought of the world at largo,
and the Church, of which he is a member, re-acts upon the inmost
feelings of the believer. The kingdom of God is not yet separated
into outward and visible, and inward and spiritual ; nor election into
that of nations and individuals.
As the Apostle looks upon the face of the world, he sees all men ?
by the light of revelation in himself, returning, through Christ,
into union with the God who made them. There is no distinction
of Jew or Gentile, circumcision or uncircumcision. Soon he passes
over into another point of view, "setting the world in their hearts."
Two dispensations are in the bosom of every man who comes to the
SUBJECT OF THE EPISTLE. 33
knowledge of the truth ; these are symbolised by two words, the Law
and Faith. The one is slavery, the other freedom ; the one death,
the other life ; the one strife, the other peace ; the one alienation
from God, the other reconciliation with him. Not at once does the
one dispensation take the place of the other. There is a period of
natural life first ; the Law enters and plants the seeds of mortal
disease. Will and knowledge, the common sources of human
action, begin to decompose, the will to evil struggling with
the knowledge of good. The creature is made powerless to act by
his consciousness of sin; the Law only terrifies he dies at the very
sight of it ; it is a dry "eye" turning every way upon his misery.
The soul, hanging between good and evil, is in a state of paralysis,
doing what it would not, and hating itself for what it does. But,
again, the soul is persuaded by many arguments that " the Law is
dead ; " it throws away the worser half, and clings to its risen Lord.
Faith is the hand by which it is united to Him the instrument
whereby it is accepted, renewed, sanctified the sense through which
it looks up to God, revealing Himself in man, and around on creation.
These two, the Law and Faith, are so inseparable, that they seem
each to derive their meaning from the other. Faith is not the Law ;
the Law is not Faith. Whatever is not Faith is the Law ; whatever is
not the Law is Faith. The Law, no less than Faith, is an inward
feeling a tablet of stone, yet written also on fleshly tables of the
heart. Yet the Apostle s manner of speaking of both is such as, at
first sight, prevents our perception of this. Through a great portion
of the Epistle he drops their subjective character, and represents
them to us as powers, almost as persons the symbols of the past and
present of the followers of Moses and Christ, arrayed against each
other in the battlefield of the world and the human heart ; blended
in the example of Abraham ; typified in the first and second Adam ;
the figures of two kinds of death, in sin and to sin.
In the course of the Epistle we pass more and more inward to the
dividing asunder of the flesh and spirit, until darkness takes the
place of light, and death of life. More than once the shadow of
VOL. IT. D
34 EPISTLE TO THE BOMANS.
peace rests upon us in passing, but we must first enter into the
depths of human nature, and take part in the struggle, ere we can
attain finally to that rest which is in Christ Jesus. At length the
body of death slips from us : the law of the spirit of life prevails
over the law of sin. And yet the fleshly body, though dead to sin,
still cleaves to us : it has ceased to strive against the spirit, but is
not yet adopted into the fellowship of Christ. But, though groaning
within ourselves, we have the inward witness of the Spirit ; we know
that all things are working together for good : we ask in triumph,
lt If God be for us, who can be against us ? "
Thus far we have proceeded from without inwards, that is to say,
from the relation of the Gospel to Jew and Gentile, and its place in
the history of the world, to its influence on the heart and conscience.
At this point the former aspect of the Epistle re-appears. The
question of salvation is no longer personal, but national. All man
kind have been included under sin ; all mankind, even as Abraham,
are righteous by faith : "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall
all be made alive." Thence the Apostle digressed to guard against
practical inferences ; to describe the inward need of pardon as before
the outward. But still there was one exception to the offer of
universal salvation. All the world was included ; but the favoured
nation seemed by its own act to exclude itself from the] gracious
circle. As a nation the Jews had rejected the Gospel ; and to them
the Apostle returns, first, to justify their rejection, secondly, to
prophesy their restoration.
It has been remarked above that Baur considers these chapters as
the substance of the Epistle, and views the eight previous ones as a
mere introduction. It is certainly true that St. Paul is writing on a
subject of the deepest interest to himself, as we may gather from the
very vehemence of his tone, and, as we should naturally infer, not
less interesting to those whom he is addressing. The chapters which
speak of the restoration of the Jews are not a mere digression from
his previous subject ; without them the scheme of Providence would
be incomplete, and the elder dispensation unmeaning and unex
plained ; the hope of universal redemption, too, at variance with the
SUBJECT OF THE EPISTLE. 35
fact. They are an integral portion of the Epistle, and connect with
the early chapters, in which the same objections which are there met
struggle vainly for utterance (c. iii.). But it disturbs the whole
balance and proportion of the Epistle to maintain that all the great
subjects that have preceded meet in one point, which is contained in
a few verses of the eleventh chapter. For it must be observed that
the greater part even of the three chapters themselves is taken up
with the justification of the rejection of the Jews, and a small section
only with their restoration. The restoration of the Jews themselves
is not a mere isolated act of the grace of God, but an enlargement of
the whole scheme, in which the Gentiles also are to have part. " So
then God concluded all under sin that he might have mercy upon all."
The remainder of the Epistle is a practical exhortation to Christian
graces and moral virtues ; commencing with a general invitation to
a holy life, or, as the Apostle expresses it in language borrowed from
the Law, to present the body a living sacrifice. The ground of this
invitation is the mercy of God, as set forth in the scheme of Provi
dence: " So then God concluded all under sin that he might have
mercy upon all ; " "I beseech you, therefore." Thence the Apostle
passes onwards, as towards the conclusion of several Epistles, to a
series of practical precepts, some of which have a peculiar reference
to the state and circumstances of the early Church. Here the
connexion with the main subject of the Epistle appears to drop, and
tlie very want of connexion leads us to remark that the separate
duties are not regarded by the Apostle as absorbed in the single
truth of righteousness by faith, but are stated by him independently
of it. Throughout the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth chapters
there is scarcely the least reference to the preceding portions of the
Epistle. Thence the Apostle digresses still further to a personal
narrative, in which, as towards the conclusion of the Epistle to the
Galatians, in a few pregnant verses, the main subject of the Epistle
is again introduced ; whence he returns once more to himself and
his intended visit, and his mission to Jerusalem, and concludes with
salutations of the brethren.
36 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
TIME AND PLACE.
THE time and place of writing the Epistle to the Romans are dis
tinctly marked in the fifteenth chapter. The Apostle is on his way
to Jerusalem, "ministering to the saints," xv. 25., in accordance
with his half-expressed intention in 1 Cor. xvi. 4. He is carrying
up the contributions of Macedonia and Achaia, for the poor at Jeru
salem, ver. 26. Having completed his labours in Asia Minor and
Greece, xv. 23. (compare 2 Cor. x. 13.), when his mission to Jeru
salem is accomplished, ver. 28., he hopes to visit the Roman converts
on his way to Spain, ver. 22. ; a purpose which he has often enter
tained, xv. 22., but never fulfilled, i. 12. (Compare Acts, xix. 21.)
The mention of Cenchrea, the port of Corinth, on the Saronic Gulf,
in xvi. 1., agrees with the other circumstances, in indicating his
second visit to Corinth as the time and place of writing the Epistle.
In reference to these allusions it may be remarked : (1.) That the
Apostle, though on his way to Rome, has no intention of making
Rome the resting-place from his labours. He is the Apostle
of the whole world, hastening onward, ere his sun sets, " to the
extreme west " of Clement. His preference of Spain above other
countries might be suggested by the circumstance that the Gospel
had not yet spread there, and that he went to plant it. Or,
more probably, considering the definite manner in which he
speaks of his intention, he was led to choose Spain rather than
Africa or Italy, from some acquaintance with, or invitation from,
Jews or Christians already settled there. As there is no reason
to suppose that the journey was ever accomplished, it is useless
to speculate further on the motive of it. (2.) It is observable
also that he wrote the Epistle to the Romans from Corinth, or
TIME AND PLACE. 37
its neighbourhood, and therefore after the second Epistle to the
Corinthians, which already indicates that a reaction had taken place
in the Corinthian Church in favour of the Apostle ; a change of
feeling which might probably be confirmed by the Apostle s visit.
Supposing this to have been the case, the Apostle, though in the
midst of that city of factions, was writing the Epistle to the Romans
at a time when their violence was abated. This agrees with the
conciliatory tone of the Epistle, as pointed out in the two preceding
essays, which also harmonizes with the immediate occasion of his
journey to Jerusalem. For (3.) at the very time of writing, the
Gentile Apostle was engaged in carrying up alms to the Jewish
Church at Jerusalem, much after the manner that other Jewish pil
grims brought gifts from distant parts of the Empire for the service
of the Temple. He was fearful of the violence of his countrymen
in Judea, and not without apprehension of the feeling with which
the Church might regard him, xv. 31. Yet " his heart s desire to
wards Israel " was not dead within him, notwithstanding his fears
and sufferings. He had been for a long time previously gathering
the alms in Asia, 1 Cor. xvi. I., as well as in Greece, according to an
agreement which he had entered into with the Apostles at Jerusalem
on a previous visit, Gal. ii. 10. Speaking after the manner of men.
may we not say that no one could be long employed in such mission
of charity, without feeling his soul melt towards those who were its
objects ? What had never been personal hostility to the Church at
Jerusalem, must soon have given way, in a mind so sensitive as St.
Paul s, to the liveliest sympathy with them. In his own words to
the Corinthians it might be said : " His heart is enlarged towards
them; they are not straitened in him, but in themselves." Nor
could this insensible change have occurred, without drawing
his thoughts to their place in the scheme of Providence. The feel
ings of his own mind would inevitably cast a distant light and shade
on the Jewish and Gentile world.
The Epistle to the Komans is naturally compared with the
D 3
38 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
Epistle to the Galatians ; the subjects are the same, or nearly so, the
illustrations often similar, and minute resemblances of language sur
prisingly numerous. Yet the Epistle to the Galatians would have
been in great measure unintelligible to us, but for the larger growth
and fuller development of the same truths in the Epistle to the
Romans. The first mentioned Epistle is personal and occasional ; it
has much of passion and sadness ; it bears the impress everywhere of
the struggle which agitated the Galatian converts, and could only have
been written to a Church which was known by face to the Apostle.
On the other hand, the Epistle to the Romans, except in one or two
passages, has a tone of calmness and deliberation : it is spiritual and
ideal ; the distance at which the Apostle places himself from the
strifes of the Church, enabling him to take a more extended
survey of the purposes of God. The difference between the two
Epistles is further analogous to the difference between proselytes of
the gate, and the so-called proselytes of righteousness. The
question in the one case is " circumcision," the outward symbol of
the Jewish law, which affected the minds of the converts much,
we may suppose, as that of caste would occupy the minds of the
Hindoos at the present day, or as some ritual or legal question might
prevail over the better religious feeling among ourselves. The other
Epistle never touches on the subject of circumcision, as an obligation
to be enforced, or not enforced ; but only as the seal of God s
mercy to all mankind, in the instance of the Father of the faithful,
Rom. iv. The mind of the writer is absorbed in the contemplation
of the world as divided into Jew and Gentile, past and present, the
Law and Faith. The beginnings of this contemplation are discernible
in the Epistle to the Galatians ; but more as a feeling or spiritual
instinct, less as a system or scheme of Providence. " In Christ
Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision,
but a new creature." But there is a height not yet attained to, at
which every obstacle disappears, and the ways of God are justified
finally, the circumcision accepted through faith, and the uncircum
cision j the circumcision again returning to God in Christ, and the
TIME AND PLACE. 39
length and breadth of Divine love made manifest. This is only
reached in the Epistle to the Romans.
No certain inference respecting the length of time by which the
Epistle to the Romans is separated from the Epistle to the Galatians
can be drawn from these considerations. It is of more importance
to remark, that in reading the Epistle to the Romans, we have already
advanced in the series of Epistles a step onward towards the
Epistles of the Imprisonment.
D 4
IIPO2 TQMAIOY2.
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. I.
IIPOS
IIAYA02 ciovXos Irjcrov yjpia-rov, K\rjro<; aTrocrroXos d<f)(*)pL~ 1
eis evayyeXioz; 0eov, o TT^oeTT^yyeiXaro Sia T0)^7rpo(f)ij 2
T. 1 7. The introduction
to the Epistle to the Romans is
marked by two striking charac
teristics of the Apostle: (1.) a
rhetorical one, the aggregation
of clauses, which seems to arise
out of the inadequacy of the
Apostle s language to master or
contain his thought ; (2.) a con
sciousness (which is character
istic also of the whole Epistle,
and of all St. Paul s writings)
of the continuousness of the
work of Providence, in the Old
and the New dispensations, in
Christ and in the Apostle him
self.
SovXoQ Irjaov xpiffrov, the ser
vant."] The servant of Christ,
" who is the Lord of all," as
Moses and David, in the Old
Testament, are called the ser
vants of God ; and in a more
spiritual sense, the servant of
Christ, as expressing devotedness
and humility ; as opposed to the
pleaser of men (Gal. i. 10. : "For
if I yet pleased men, I should
not be the servant of Christ " ) ;
and, lastly, with an allusion to
his ministerial duty and labour
of love in the Gospel, " your ser
vant for Jesus sake " (2 Cor. iv.
5.). The alteration in the mean
ing of the word may remind us
of the change through which the
Greek language had itself passed,
and of the still greater change
which it was destined to pass
through, as " the weak things of
this world began to confound the
strong." Compare John, xii. 15. ;
1 Cor. vii. 22.
K\r)TO ciTTooroAoc, called an
apostle.] The two words are to
be taken together, as below, fcArj-
TOLQ ayioiQ. In such expressions
the predicate does not necessarily
define the subject (as though the
Apostle had intended to contrast
himself with other Apostles, who
were not called), but only de
scribes it, or draws out an idea
already involved in it. The other
mode of construing the phrase,
according to which K\T]TOQ is
made a substantive, as in v. 6.,
and separated from otTroVroXoc,
does not suit either the rhythm
or sense of 1 Cor. i. 1.,
K\r)TOQ aTToaroAoe Irjffov
or the use of KXyrolg ayiotc, m
mediately after r/yiao-jueVotc, in
ver. 2. ; and cannot, therefore,
be adopted here.
d^WjOKr/ieVoc, separated."] In
the same sense as in Gal. 1. 15. :
o aopffag pe /c
fjiov (where, however, the
meaning is modified by the con
text, because the Apostle is de
scribing the separation as it
existed from his very birth in
the purposes of God), and as in
Acts. xiii. 2., where the Holy
Ghost says " Separate me "
VER. 1, 2.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
43
ROMANS.
1 PAUL, a servant of Jesus Christ, called* an apostle,
2 separated unto the gospel of God, which he had pro-
(a<fiopiffare S// /zot) Barnabas and
Saul for the work.
etc evayyeXtov, to the Gospel.]
Either to be a believer of the
Gospel, or to be a preacher of
the Gospel, or both. As the two
ideas are inseparable in the Apo
stle s mind, as in the earliest
ages it was hardly possible to be
a believer, and not a preacher of
the Gospel, and as the word itself
was not yet strictly defined in
use, it is not necessary for us
to attempt to distinguish them.
evayyeXioj , in the sense of preach
ing the Gospel, occurs also in
2 Cor. ii. 12. : EXtfwv e tig TJJV
etc TO evayyeXtov TOV
v : and x. 14. &XP L T"l
KO.I vfji&v ifydaffafj.Ev kv TV evayye-
X/W.
Seov, of God.~\ The meaning
of the genitive case (whether in
Greek or English makes no dif
ference) is especially difficult to
determine in the New Testament,
where it refers to God or Christ :
ewayye Xiov Seov may either mean
the Gospel about God or the
Divine Gospel, or the Gospel of
which God is the author. The
same difficulty occurs respecting
the parallel expression evayyiXiov
Xpiarov, in 2 Cor. xi. 7. In both
places the genitive may be con
sidered as implying all the rela
tions in which God or Christ
stands to the Gospel, whether as
author, teacher, or subject.
Compare Matt. iv. 23., evayyl-
Xiov rfjg /3#<rtXe/ag TOV fteoUjEph. i.
13., TO evayytXtov TIJQ cr(i)Tr]pia<; ;
2 Cor. iv. 4,, TO evayyeXtov TJJC
c)oj7e TOV xpiarov ; yet the word
"of" is plainer than any ex
planation can make it .
The indefiniteness of the lan
guage of the New Testament
harmonises with the infinity of
the subject. It has not the pre
cision of Attic Greek ; but could
the precision of Attic Greek
have expressed the truths of the
Gospel ? would it have correctly
represented the imperfection of
human knowledge respecting Di
vine things ? We cannot imagine
an individual separated from his
age ; no more can we imagine
the truths of Christianity sepa
rated from the time at which
they appeared, or from the stage
of language in which they came
to the birth. It may be truly
said that, as the style of Plato
corresponds to the bloom of
Greek philosophy, so does the
imperfection of the style of the
New Testament correspond to
our imperfect conception of
what is above us. With "stam
mering lips and another tongue "
the Gospel spoke to the child
and to the simple.
6 TrpoeirrjyyEiXaTo, which he
promised before.] The drift of
44
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On, I.
avrov Iv ypacfxus dyiais irepl rov vlov OLVTOV, rov ye-
vopevov IK crTre/o/xaros davelS Kara o~dpKa, rov opicrOevros
vlov OGOV tv 8iWju,ei Kara Trvevpa ayio^crvv^ e f d^acrra-
this parenthetical allusion is not,
as elsewhere, to call the prophets
as witnesses of the Gospel, or
even to show that God had pre
pared the way for it long before,
a thought which also occurs in
Gal. iii. 8., and in several other
passages, but simply to set forth
the majesty of the Gospel. It is
a part of its greatness that it was
heralded by prophecy.
$m rwv TTjOO^r/ruJv.] " The Pro
phets " include Moses in Luke
xxiv. 27., and Samuel in Acts
iii. 24 ; xiii. 20. ? not only those
to whose writings the term is
commonly applied.
kv ypct^aty ay/cuc.] For the
use of ypa^rj without the article,
compare Tim. iii. 16. ; with words
like ypa^//, S eoe, Tr^eDjua, vcyLioe,
the article is omitted or retained,
without affecting the sense. Like
proper names, they are sufficiently
defined by themselves, as we say
in English indifferently " Scrip
ture " or " the Scripture."
2 6. The marks of paren
thesis in the English Version are
better omitted. The series of re
lative clauses which are inserted
between them, delay the sense,
rather than interrupt it.
3. 7TjOl TOV V\OV CtVrOV, COnCCm-
ing his Son.~\ These words may
be connected, either with evayye-
\wv Seov in the first verse, or
with TrpoeTrrjyyeiXaTO in the
second ; either the Gospel of
which Christ the Son of God is
the subject, or the Gospel which
God by the prophets promised
before respecting his Son. The
last is the more natural order.
The verses that follow are some
of the most difficult in the Epi
stles of St. Paul ; we cannot ex
press their meaning adequately,
we can only approach it. This
difficulty arises partly from the
dimness of the thought as it pre
sents itself to our minds com
pared with its intensity to St.
Paul ; partly from the inversion
of modes of thought, so that what
is with us the effect is to the
Apostle the cause, or conversely ;
and also from the imperfect and
fragmentary character of the anti
thesis, which is begun, but not
carried out fully, and in which
it is vain to look for the corre
spondence of the different mem
bers, as it breaks off almost as
soon as we observe it.
Kara vapKa, according to the
flesh>~\ opposed to the words in
the following verse, "according
to the spirit of holiness," as yevo-
P.EVOV !K (77Tpjuaroc AavftS to 6pi~
aQivroQ vloi Seov. The nature of
the opposition will be seen by
a comparison of other passages.
(rapt, is opposed to Tryti^ia, as the
outward, human, perishable to the
invisible and eternal. Thus in
Gal. iv. 29., Ishmael, the type of
the law, is /caret o-apjca ; Isaac,
the child of promise, is Kara
TrvtvfjLa. Abraham is spoken of
in Rom. iv. 1. as a "progenitor
according to the flesh," or as
" having found benefits " accord
ing to the flesh, and the Apostle
speaks of himself as having once
known "Christ according to
the flesh," that is, probably, as
a temporal Messiah (2 Cor. v.
, 3, 4.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
45
mised afore by his prophets in the Holy Scriptures,
3 concerning his Son, who * came of the seed of David
4 according to the flesh ; appointed * to be the Son
of God with power, according to the spirit of holi-
16.). In the two latter passages
is implied a latent allusion to
circumcision, the sign of which
was "outward in the flesh"
(Eph. ii. 11.). By a further de
velopment ffdp^ is used for the
corruption of the flesh, as Trvev^a
for the communion of the Spirit
of God. It is difficult to cir
cumscribe exactly the associa
tions of the expression Kara o-a p-
K a in this passage ; the clause
may be paraphrased, "concern
ing his Son, who by fleshly de
scent in His outward human
nature, and in relation to the
Jewish dispensation, was of the
seed of David." Compare ix. 3
5 ; also, for the general meaning,
John i. 14., 6 \6yoQ (rapE, iyf.ve.TO.
Antithesis is a favourite figure
in the writings of St. Paul ; almost
(may we not say ? ) the very form
in which he conceives the Gospel
itself. There are times before
and times after, a first Adam
and a second Adam, the Law and
Faith, the flesh and spirit, the
old man and the new man, death,
life, burial, resurrection, the
identity and difference of the
believer and his Lord: "All
things are double one against the
other." Even the same truths
have two aspects ; what is death
when looked at from one side is
life from another. This opposi
tion is traceable in the least
things as well as in the greatest,
not only in the essential anti
theses of the Gospel, but also in
turns of thought and forms of
speech It is the dialectical
frame in which the ideas of the
Apostle are arranged ; it is the
grammatical frame in which his
sentences are cast. Comp. Rom.
i. 32. ; iv. 25. ; x. 10.
4. opivdevroQ vlov Seov. ] The
translation of these words in the
English version rather evades
their difficulty ; the Greek bpi-
(rOerTOQ meaning determined, ap
pointed, and not " declared." But
how could Christ have been made
or appointed to be the Son of God
by the resurrection from the
dead, who was so, as St. Paul
himself declares, eternally? (Col.
i. 16.) We may answer in the
Apostle s own words, "he is speak
ing as a man" from a human
point of view, as the truth ap
peared to the disciples who fol
lowed the successive stages of
our Lord s ministry.
Contrasted with this language
of time, is another mode under
which the Apostle sometimes
describes the great facts of the
Gospel, which may be termed in
the language of philosophy " the
contemplation of them under the
form of eternity ; " that is, the
conception of them as they are
anticipated in the purposes of
God. Examples of this opposite
usage are such expressions as
God choosing men before the
foundation of the world, Eph. i. 4. ;
also ver. 3. 5. ; Rev. xiii. 8. ; Mic.
v. 2. But human language and
thought do not easily sustain
themselves at this height ; hence
46
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. I.
(T0)S VCKpOJV, irjCTOV XPICTTOV TOV KVplOV
yapw Kal aTTOCTTO\r]v els vTraKorjv Trio-Tews iv
Si O? eXot-
the Apostle sometimes mingles
both modes of speech, some
times falls into the opposite, as
in this passage.
kv cWa/^ft.] Opposed, together
with Kara Trvevfia ayni)ffvvr}Q^ to
Kara capita : and answering to e
araffTuaeuQ reKputi , the symbol
everywhere of the great power
of God.
Kara Trrev/jLa ayiuvvvYjc, accord
ing to the spirit of holiness.^
The simple antithesis would have
been Kara (rcipKa. and Kara Trvevpa :
the latter member is expanded
by St. Paul into Kara Trvevpa
ayt(i)avvr]Q. What is irvevua ayiw-
avi>f)Q ? and how is it connected
with Christ being appointed to
be the Son of God ? By irvEv^a
ayuoavvriQ is not meant the Holy
Spirit, in that more precise sense
in which this term is used in
other passages of Scripture, and
still less in the yet more defined
one of the creeds ; but that invi
sible power or principle, whereby
Christ holds communion with the
Father and with His Church, as
crap is the principle of frailty or
humanity, by which lie is linked
to human nature and to the Jew
ish dispensation. So in 1 Peter,
iii. 18. it is said : "Christ hath
once suffered for our sins, being
put to death in the flesh, but quick
ened in the Spirit." So in 1 Tim.
iii. 16.: "God was manifest in
the flesh, justified in the Spirit;"
and in Rom. vi. 10. the same
double order of things is implied,
though differently expressed
"In that he died, he died unto
sin once ; in that he liveth, he
liveth unto God ; " as it is further
extended in Rom. viii. 11, 12. to
the Christian who is in the image
of Christ, as well as to Christ
himself "But if Christ be in
you, the body is dead, because of
sin ; but the spirit is life, because
of righteousness;" and the re
surrection, as in this passage, is
connected with the indwelling
Spirit of Christ "But if the
Spirit of him that raised up Jesus
from the dead dwelleth in you,
he that raised up Christ from
the dead shall also quicken your
mortal bodies by his Spirit that
dwelleth in you."
The ideas of Christ, life, the
Spirit, holiness, are essentially
connected, and hardly separable
in Scripture. So Acts, ii. 27. :
" Thou wilt not suffer thy holy
one to see corruption." Eternal
life is also spiritual life, as phy
sical death is nearly allied to
spiritual death. But the parti
cular order in which the links
of the chain succeed each other,
is accidental and uncertain. It
might have been said of Christ,
that He was Holy, because He
was the Son of God, and there
fore rose from the dead ; or that
He was made the Son of God by
the resurrection of the dead, be
cause He was holy. The very ar
bitrariness of relations of thought
when applied to Divine things,
is of itself a limit in the ex
planation of this passage, which,
as far as we can analyse it, ap
pears to unite two thoughts. St.
Paul speaks of Christ as raised
up by holiness to His Divine
estate, as he might also have
spoken of Him as quickened by
the Spirit. The two expressions
meet in the words " Spirit of
holiness," with which agrees
(Kara) the fact that he was " ap-
VER. 5.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
47
ness, by resurrection* of the dead, Jesus Christ our
Lord * ; by whom we * received grace and apostle-
pointed to be the Son of God."
Following the trains of thought
which have been suggested by
the previous remarks, we may
paraphrase the passage thus :
" Concerning Christ who be
longed to two worlds, a former
and a latter one : the first, earth
ly, human, Jewish ; the other,
spiritual and invisible : the Son
of David appointed to be the
Son of God, as He was holy, and
had the Spirit of God dwelling
in Him." All this is not fully or
definitely expressed in this pas
sage ; but is yet so closely con
nected with it, that the attempt
to explain the several words be
comes almost unmeaning without
such a prolongation of them.
e araaraffelog vf/cpoij , by resur
rection of the dead.~] Still another
" cause," as it were, of Christ s di
vinity. The English translation
" by the resurrection from the
dead," obliges us to understand EK
before I CK-JDUJJ , which is said to be
omitted, in consequence of the it:
preceding with aruaraffeioQ. But
the words araaraaiQ rexpuv occur
fourteen times in the New Testa
ment, and always in the ordinary
sense of the resurrection of the
dead ; we cannot therefore as
sume a new one for them, in this
passage. Christ is appointed to
be the Son of God, not after or
in consequence of His own resur
rection, but by resurrection of
the dead, in which He and man
kind are thought of as united :
" He is the firstfruits of them
that sleep." Yet how can the re
surrection, either of Himself or
of mankind in general, be re
garded as the cause of His eternal
being ? We must admit that our
order of thought would have been
different. Often there are cases,
as metaphysicians tell us, in
which ideas of cause and effect
seem to run up into one another,
especially in the spiritual world
to which the very notion of
cause and effect is hardly ap
plicable. So little consequence
is it which comes first, that here
language not only identifies, but
transposes them. What are acts
become attributes ; and the at
tributes of Christ or God, causes
or instruments. We should have
begun with speaking of the di
vinity of Christ, as witnessed by
His resurrection ; and of our ris
ing again because He had risen.
Here the course of the thought
is the very reverse. The resur
rection is not a state which He
passes through, but a power em
bodied in Him, in the same way
as life or the spirit might be
described as embodied in Him,
nearly as Christ Himself says
(John, xi. 25.): "I am the re
surrection and the life.
e/,- denotes the cause, or, more
precisely, the point of origin, not
tne proof; as in Herod, ii. 63. :
UTroOi ljffKovffir e/c rttjy rpw/ictrw? ;
James ii. 18., ^e/sw /c rut tpyw
pov TV/V TTtartr ; in which latter the
idea of proof is not derived from
the preposition, but from the verb.
5. f)t ovAa/3o/jfj .] The Apostle
uses the plural when speaking of
himself alone, as IThess.ii. 17, 18.
The aorist is not put for the
perfect ; though here, as else
where in the New Testament, it
is employed in a way of which
the English idiom hardly admits.
The Apostle might equally well
speak of his reception of the
48
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. I.
TCHS Wvtarw vrrep TOV (W/xaros CLVTOV, iv ots ecrre KOI
K\rjrol *Irjo~ov ^OICTTOT), TTOLCTW rois ovcrw iv Patfjir} ayaTrrj- 7
rots Oeov K\7]Tol<s dyioi9. X^/ t
KOL KvpLov Irjcrov
ra> #( /xov Sia Irjcrov o 8
Apostleship as aorist or perfect ;
that is, with or without reference
to his present state. Compare
v. 13.
fig VITCLKOYIV TTLffTE^QEV TTCLfflV TO~IQ
Wvefftv. ] v-rraKoff is used abso
lutely, for obedience or reception
of the Gospel, in Rom. xv. 18.
Here the addition of TTIOTCWC con
trasts the obedience of the Gos
pel with the obedience of the Law.
The simplest way of taking the
words iv iraaiv TOIQ idvEaiv is with
\a/3o^U^ .... O.7TO(TTO\r]f.
" Through whom we received
grace and the office of an Apostle
among the Gentiles, to the in
tent that they might receive the
faith." Compare xvi. 25. :
fj.vcrrr)ptov elg vTrctKorfv TT KJTEI^Q
tig Trarra ret eQvr) "yvupLaQirroQ.
virep rov OVOJJLCITOG avrov^for his
name. ] " For the setting forth of
his name," may depend either on
eXafiopev or on VTTO.KOYIV TT/CTCWC.
For a similar ambiguity or double
order of words, compare ver. 3. and
5., and the preceding note. As
in the Old Testament, in the name
of God is implied the remem
brance of what He had done for
His people Israel; so in the name
of Christ is summed up what
He had done and was, what the
Christian ever bore in mind, the
seal which marked him, the name
wherewith he was named.
6. K\r)rol If/eroD xptaTOv. ] K\rj-
TOQ is a substantive ; not called
of Jesus Christ, but called ones
who are Jesus Christ s, like K\rj-ol
TOV Atiwriov in 3 Kings, 1. 47.
Irjffov ^pifrrovy Phil. 1.
The calling of men in Scripture,
as the initiative act, is not at
tributed to Christ, but to God,
Rom. xi. 29.; Gal. i.6.; 2 Thess.
iv. 7.
7. ayaTrrjTolQ Seov K\rjTo1g ayi-
ote? beloved of God, called saints. ]
Could the Apostle, who was un
known by face to the Christians
of Rome, speak thus confidently
of them ? It may be answered,
that he uses the language of hope
and charity; he conceives of them
in idea, in reference to the new
state into which they had passed,
and the privileges of which they
are made partakers. What is
said of them would have been
said by the Apostle of all Chris-
tains, who had passed from death
into life, by the very fact of their
separating themselves from the
Jewish or Gentile world. Yet
stronger language of apparent
commendation in the first Epistle
to the Corinthians, is not incon
sistent with the imputation of
grave delinquency to the whole
hurch. Like the chosen people
of old, even amid sins and infir
mities they are the elect of God.
yapig .... KOI elprjvr].^ See
1 Thess. i. 1.
The preceding verses may be
regarded as an amplification of
IlaiiXoc Pwjua/oic xalpeiv. But in
this simple form, the Apostle has
inserted his own office and autho
rity to preach the Gospel, the
subject of the Gospel which is
Christ, who is not only the Mes
siah of the Jews, but the ap
pointed Son of God, who made
VEE. 68.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
ship, for obedience to the faith among all the Gentiles
6 for his name : among whom are ye also the called of
7 Jesus Christ : to all that be in Rome, beloved of God,
called * saints : Grace to you and peace from God our
Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
s First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you
him an Apostle, and gave him
the Gentiles for his field of la-
bour, among whom they are in
cluded who dwell at Rome, to
whom, returning to his exordium,
he wishes health and peace, " not
as the world giveth " (John, xiv.
27.), but as one believer would to
another, from God the Father
and the Lord Jesus Christ.
8, 9. It is characteristic of the
Apostle, that all his Epistles, with
the exception of the Galatians,
begin with language of concilia
tion. As in ordinary life we
first address one another with
courteous salutation, so does the
Apostle introduce himself to his
readers, with the words of Chris
tian charity. He lingers for an
instant around that pleasant im
pression of a Church without
spot, such as it never will be
in this world, before he passes
onward to reprove and exhort
those whom he is addressing. It
is an ideal Church that he con
templates, elect, spiritual, heaven
ly, going on to perfection, the
image of which seems ever to
blend with, and to overshadow
those who bear its glorious
titles.
Trp&Tov p.ev } ~] as in iii. 2. and
elsewhere, with no " secondly."
rw 0cw /-tow.] Compare Acts,
xxvii. 23.-" The angel of God,
whose I am, and whom I serve."
c>ia Irjaov XjOtoTou.] A general
Christian formula. " I give
VOL. II.
thanks, as I do all things, through
Christ." In the introductions to
the Epistles the language of com
mon life is idealised and spiri
tualised. The manner is Eastern,
a circumstance which, from our
familiarity with the New Testa
ment, we often fail to recognise ;
it is also that of the Apostle and
his time. Were we to translate
verses 8 10. into common words,
they might be expressed as fol
lows : "I rejoice to hear of
your faith everywhere, for I so
lemnly declare that I never forget
you ; it is one of my first prayers
to come to you." But, partly
from the intensity of his feelings,
partly from the style of the age
and country in which he wrote,
most of all from the circumstance
that the ordinary events of life
come to him with a Divine power,
and seem, as it were, to be oc
curring in a spiritual world, his
words fall into a different mould.
He employs language, according
to our sober colours of expression,
too strong for the occasion ; as
where he says that their faith is
spoken of throughout the whole
world ; or where he calls God to
witness of his desire to come to
them, though there was no reason
for them to doubt this. So
again in 1 Thess. i. 8. : " For
from you sounded out the word
of the Lord, not only in Mace
donia and Achaia, but also in
every place your faith to God-
50
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. I.
, OTL T
KaTayyeXXeTai ei> 6 Xw 9
KocrfJLo.). fjidprvs ydp pov icrriv 6 Oeos, $ \arpeva) tv
L [Jiov iv T( euayyeXiw rov vlov avrov, a)? doia- 10
TraVroTe ejrl T&V
Sed^ez>O9, ei TTWS 1787; TTOTC evoScoft^o-ojuai e^ rw ^eX^- n
TOU ^eou eXOeiv TTpbs v/xa?. TTi7TO0co yap
TL /xeraSa) ^aptcr/jta v)at^ Tr^eujutari/co^ ets TO
, TOVTO 8e ecrTtz/ crvfJL7rapaK\7jOrji aL iv v\
VTTfp.
" 12
t
ward is spread abroad ; so that we
need not speak any thing." Yet,
at the time of writing these
words, the Apostle could hardly
have travelled beyond the limits
of Macedonia and Achaia.
Comp. Phil. i. 8. as an instance
of the same affection towards
those "unknown to him by face;"
and, as an example of the same
intensity of language, Gal. i. 20.,
where he calls God to witness that
" he lies not " about the details
of his visits to Jerusalem.
OTL i] TriffTLQ vfji&t , that your
faith.~\ No commentary could
throw half as much light on the
Epistle as a knowledge of the
state of those whose faith is
thus described. Had the Roman
Church long ago or recently
been converted to the Gospel ?
May we suppose that the news
of it was carried thither by
the "strangers of Rome" who
about twenty-five years previ
ously had been present at the
day of Pentecost ? Is it possible
that the name of Christ himself
had reached the metropolis of the
world during his life- time ? Had
Priscilla and Aquila any ac
quaintance with the Gospel be
fore they met with St. Paul at
Corinth ? Who were those bre
thren whom the prisoner Paul
found at Puteoli, or who came
to meet him at Appii forum ? No
answer can be given to these
questions, yet the statement of
them is not without interest.
There were many in the Roman
Church whose names were known
4o the Apostle ; some whom he
describes as of note among the
Apostles who were before him.
Comp. Acts.xxviii. 15 31. Rom.
xvi.
w Xorpfvw, whom I serve."]
" The God whom I serve " is an
Old Testament expression, Dan.
vi. 16. kv rut Trrevfj-ari pov, that
is, in my inmost soul, which is
also my spiritual being.
o>c a^ia\i7rrwe[] The balance
of the clauses is best preserved
by taking these words with fjiveiav
vf.Mi> 7Toiovfj,ai f and TravTore with
CEO^EVOC: how unceasingly I make
mention of you, ever praying for
you.
JO. EL TTU} tj^rj 7TOTE
fj.ai.~] EL Trwcj if as I hope ;
now; TTore, at length;
ffofj-ai, I shall prosper, or have
a prosperous journey. The de
rivation of Evodwdtiaopat, from
6 oc, does not commonly enter
into its meaning. (1 Cor. xvi. 2. ;
3 John, 2. ; Jer. ii. 37.) Yet there is
no reason why St.Paul, whose style
is so full of plays of language,
VER. 912.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS,
51
9 all, that your faith is spoken of in * all the world. For
God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the
gospel of his Son ; how without ceasing I make mention
10 of you, always in my prayers making request, if by
any means now at length I may have a prosperous
11 journey by the will of God to come unto you. For I
long to see you, that I may impart unto you some
12 spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established ; that is,
that I may be together comforted in *you by the mutual
should not have revived its ety
mological sense, which occurs in
Tobit, v. 18. 21. iv deXr^an :
for the use of iv compare Thu-
cydides, i.77. : IVTOIQ d^ioiotg I OJJLOIQ
TO.Q Kpiaeig TToirivavreg. In such ex
pressions the preposition, though
conveniently translated " by,"
really expresses a closer relation,
the action being regarded in a
figure as inhering or consisting
in the object.
11. ^apio-fja v/juv TrvevfJictTLKoi .^
Not a miraculous gift, as ap
pears from the following verse.
Compare 2 Cor. i. 15. : "I was
minded to come unto you, that
ye might have a second benefit "
(fievTepav X"P tJ/ ^X 7 ? 7 "* ) an( ^ Rom.
xv. 29.
12. TOVTO fie <7rii>.] Not wishing
to " Lord it over their faith ; "
but rather, to " be a helper of
their joy ; " the Apostle corrects
his former expressions. " My
desire is to instruct you, and do
you good ; that is, for us to in
struct and do one another good.
In giving I shall also receive."
Compare, for the feeling, what
may be termed the circle of
Christian sympathy, in 2 Cor. i.
4 8., and, for a similar correction
of a word, with TOVTO eVrt, Rom.
vii. 18.
comforted.~\
The English Version has a slight
inaccuracy in the words " to
gether with you ;" for which may
be substituted, "that I may be
together comforted in you."
The meaning of the word irapa-
KaXelv, as of Trapa/cXr/roe, wavers
between consolation and exhor
tation, or includes both. In the
LXX., the former sense is the
prevailing one ; here both are
combined. What the progress
of language and the analysis of
Christian feelings have separated
into two, was, in the age of the
Apostles, one idea and one word,
with a scarcely perceptible diver
sity of meaning. The idea of
" consolation " implied in it does
not, however, refer to comfort or
sympathy in any particular sor
row, but rather to the conscious
communion of Christians in this
present evil world. Nor is there
implied in the notion of exhorta
tion the bringing forward of state
ments or precepts respecting the
Christian faith, but the imparting
of a new spirit or temper of mind.
If, allowing for the great difference
between our own and the Apo
stolic times, we could imagine a
person who had listened to a
preacher, or received the counsel
of a friend^ who exactly touched
the chords of his soul, such a
2
52
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. I.
iv dXX^Xoi9 7TtcrT&J9, VJJLOJV T Kal e/xou. ov $eXco Se v/xd? is
ayvociv, dSeX^oi, OTI 7roXXd/a9 7rpO.u.^v e\0ew 77^09
* A % % v * y^| V ^ CV ^ V V \ ^
L/77^ fl YP* TOV ovpo, iva Tiva Kapirov o~X w
t e^ v/^ Ka0a)<s Kal iv Toi9 XofTroig e0vecnv. ^EXX^criV 14
T Acat /3ap/3dpOL<;, o~O(ot9 T fcal d^o^TOtg o(f>i\Tr)<$ et/xr
TO /caT 5 e/xe irpoOvpov Kal V^JLLV Tot9 e^ Pw/xT; ev- is
, ou yd^o e7rcuo~xwo/ia,6 TO evayyekiov ~, 16
/dp $eou ecrrlv et9 crcaTrjpiav iravri, TO> TTicrTevo^Tt,
Te [TrpwToz/] Km r E\\r)vi SiKaiocrvvr) yap 0tov 17
1 Kapir6v rti/a. 2 ^4c?^ TOU
one might express himself in one
word as comforted and instructed ;
that word would be TrapaKa\e~i-
o-Qcu. For a similar connexion
of xapcucaXtiv and a--r}pieii , com
pare 1 Thess. iii. 2.; 2 Thess. ii.
17.
VjJL(i)V TE KCU jUOl),J is an Cp-
exegesis of kv dX\//Xoic, that is,
" I by your faith, and you by
mine."
13. ov S cXf* ^ vf-idg ayrotT) .]
"But I would not have you
ignorant ; " " but I want to tell
you ; " a common formula with
St. Paul, 1 Cor. xii. 1. ; 2 Cor. i.
8.; 1 Thess. iv. 13.
KOI Kw\v0]v.] "I purposed
to come and I could not ; " a more
natural mode of expression would
have been, " though I could not."
As in many other places, the
Apostle uses adversative parti
cles where the English idiom re
quires only the copulative con
junction; so here he uses the
copulative conjunction where the
English prefers the adversative
particle. It is not necessary on
this ground to assume a paren
thesis, which would spoil the em
phasis ; for what the Apostle
wishes the Romans to know, is
not only that he was intending to
come to them, but also that he was
hindered. Compare Acts, xvi.
6. ; Rom. xv. 24. ; 2 Cor. xiii. 1. ;
1 Thess. ii. 18., as illustrating
what may be termed the uncer
tainty of times and seasons in the
Apostle s journeys. He was hin
dered, either " because Satan
hindered him," 1 Thess. ii. 18. ;
or because the spirit suffered him
not, Acts, xvi. 6, 7. ; or because
he had a feeling of delicacy, such
as he speaks of in Rom. xv. 22.,
2 Cor. x. 15., in intruding on
another s field of labour, or, for
anything that appears to the con
trary, because his time had been
taken up with preaching the Gos
pel in other places. Rom. xv.
23.
14. 6(f)ti\Tr]G dpi. ] "I owe it
to all the world that I should
preach the Gospel, to the civi
lised as well as the uncivilised ;
the wise as well as the foolish."
We need not raise the ques
tion which some interpreters
have discussed, " in which half
the Romans are to be placed."
The world in which the Apo
stle lived was not Roman, but
Greek.
It is not, in the Apostle s view,
a matter of choice, or freewill,
VJSJL 1317.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
53
13 faith both of you and me. Now I would not have you
ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come
unto you,* and was let hitherto, that I might have some
u fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles. I
am debtor both to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians ;
is both to the wise, and to the unwise. So, as much as in
me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are
16 at Rome also. For I am not ashamed of the gospel 1 ;
for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one
that believeth ; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek ;
17 for therein is the righteousness of God revealed from
Add of Christ.
whether he shall preach the Gos
pel or not ; but a debt which he
owes to himself, mankind, and
God. Compare 1 Cor. ix. 16. :
" Necessity is laid upon me, and
woe is me, if I preach not the
gospel." He will not allow him
self to consider it as voluntary ;
he delights to increase the obliga
tion, claiming the Romans by a
sort of right, as Apostle of the
Gentiles, to be included in his
labours, ver. 6.
15. ovTdt TO /car e^ue 7rp60vfJor,So
as much as in me is."] Either " So
ready am I ; " or better and more
in accordance with the Apostle s
style with a pause after OUT-W,
" Even so, I am ready," that is, as
owing a debt to you as well as
them. The two ways of taking
the passage may be further modi
fied by connecting or separating
TO KUT (fjif and irp66v/jioi>, either
" I am ready," or, " touching
myself there is readiness."
" I am ready to preach the
Gospel in Rome, for I glory in it,
for it is not weak, but mighty, a
Divine power to save." The Apo
stle exults in the greatness of his
mission. He is to preach the
Gospel at Rome, before the wise,
in that great city.
SvvafjitG Sfov, a Divine power,
like StKaiocrvrtrj Seov below.
17. Passing onward to the
height of his great argument, the
Apostle involves reason within
reason, four times in three succes
sive verses. Such is the over-
logical form of Hellenistic Greek.
" I preach the Gospel, for I glory
in it; for it is not weak but
strong, a power to save to him
that has faith, for it is a revela
tion of the righteousness of God
through faith ; for the times of
that ignorance God no longer
winks at," &c. The repetition of
-/up does but represent the dif
ferent stages and aspects of the
Apostle s thought.
SiKcuoffvi r) yap 3eov."^ Viewing
these words by the light of later
controversy, interpreters have
asked whether the righteousness
here spoken of, is to be regarded
as subjective or objective, in
herent or imputed, as revealed
by God or accepted by man.
These are the "after-thoughts"
E 3
54
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
iv at>ra> a7TOKa\vTTreTaL I
O e SIKCUOS IK moreo)?
eig TTIOTIZ>,
[On. I.
ws ye -
of theology, which have no real
place in the interpretation of
Scripture. We cannot define
what is not defined by the Apo
stle himself. But if, leaving later
controversies, we try to gather
from the connexion itself a more
precise meaning, another uncer
tainty remains. For the righte
ousness of God may either mean
that righteousness which existed
always in the Divine nature, once
hidden but now revealed; or may
be regarded as consisting in the
very revelation of the Gospel it
self, in the world and in the heart
of man.
The first step to a right con
sideration of the question, is to
place ourselves within the circle
of the Apostle s thoughts and
language. The expression SIKUIO-
crvvrj Seov was familiar to the
Israelite, who, without any re
ference to St. Paul s distinction
of faith and works, used it in a
double sense for an attribute of
God and the fulfilment of the
Divine law. Compare James, i.
20. : opyi] yuparSpogSiKaiocrvrrjr
Seov OVK KctTpy a^erat. Rom. X.
3.: a.yvoovvTf.Q yap T)]v rov
SEOV %iKaioavvTf}v } KO.I TYjv l^ iav 17-
TOVVTEQ crrij(rai, rrj diKaioffvi r) TOV
Seov oi>x vTrerdyYjffav. The law,
the fulfilment of the law, and the
Divine Author of the law, pass
into each other; the mind is car
ried on imperceptibly from one
to the other. The language of
all religion, consisting as it must
in mediation between God and
man, or in the manifestation of
God in man, is full of these and
similar ambiguities, which we
should only gain a false clearness
by attempting to remove. Such
expressions in the phraseology
of philosophy necessarily involve
subject and object, a human soul
in which they are made con
scious, a Divine Being from whom
they proceed, and to whom they
have reference. It is generally
confusing to ask to which of these
they belong. Christianity is the
communion of God and man in
Christ, and, therefore, the words
which are used to express its
leading thoughts are neither here
nor there, neither in the soul of
man nor in the nature of God;
nor yet are they mere abstract
terms, denoting as they do the
joint working of both. And
so the expression "righteousness
of God," instead of being con
fined to one abstract point of
view or meaning, seems to swell
out into several: the attribute
of God, embodied in Christ, ma
nifested in the world, revealed
in the Gospel, communicated to
the individual soul ; the right
eousness not of the law, but of
faith.
cnroKaXvTTTETai, revealed.^ The
idea of "revelation" is oppos
ed in Scripture to pvrrrijpiov : it is
the day that follows the night, the
knowledge of God that supersedes
"the times of that ignorance."
Compare Rom. xvi. 25 26.:
"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, but now is made manifest,
VEB. 17.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
55
faith to faith: as it is written, But * the just shall live
by faith.
and by the scriptures of the pro
phets, according to the command
ment of the everlasting God,
made known to all nations for the
obedience of the faith." For simi
lar trains of thought, see also
Acts, xiv. 15, 16. ;xvii. 30.; Col.
i. 26, 27. To the first believers
of Christianity, the thought of
" revelation " was ever associated
with the thought of the world
that had preceded, and of the
world that still surrounded them
lying in darkness. It was con
tinuous with another revelation,
that of the sons of God, in com
parison of which it was, as it
were, darkness, as the night of
ages had been darkness in com
parison with the Gospel. Not
that the outward face of man
kind was changed; the light
was within, the revelation in the
soul itself.
K 7rt(TT(t)Q IQ 7T0TIJ ,
faith to faith. ] Either : (1.) be
ginning and ending in faith (like
2 Cor.iii. 18., changed from glory
to glory, CLTTO 3o?7 elc $6ap :
or Psalm Ixxxiii. 7., going from
strength to strength) ; springing
from faith, and producing faith,
going from one stage of faith to
another ; whether that first faith
be regarded as the faith of the
Gentile who was a law to him
self; or the faith of the Old Tes
tament, such as Abraham s was,
or such as is described in the
passage from the prophet Ha-
bakkuk ; or the faith of him who
said, " Lord. I believe, help thou
mine unbelief: " or, (2.) the
words elg Triff-u , " to faith," may
be considered as a repetition of
t rw inaTEvovTi in the preced
ing verse, to them that believe.
" The righteousness of God is
revealed by faith to those that
have faith." Compare 2 Cor. ii.
15, 16. : on xptffrov eviodia iff-
f.iVT(t) S fw iv roig ffcj^opevotg /ecu ir
role airoi\Xvfilvoi 9 OIQ JJLEV 6fffj.ii
Savarov etg Sararov, O IQ 3e d<7//>)
farjc els d)i]v. Compare also our
Lord s words, "Whoso hath, to
him shall be given." Or, (3.)
lastly, the repetition of the word
with elg (compare with this way
of taking the words, also 2 Cor.
ii. 16.) may denote a purpose,
as in Rom. vi. 19. : uWep yap
TO. pe\e vfjulov ov\a rrj
KCU rrj avopiq. dg riiv
, i. e. with the intent to
work iniquity, to produce faith,
an explanation of these pas
sages, which, though it has less
point, is more in accordance with
the style of St. Paul than the
preceding ones, and may be de
fended by the quotation from
Habakkuk, which shows that the
real stress of the passage is not
on eig TriffTtv, but on EK Tr/nrewf.
KciOwg yeypuTrreu, as it is
ivritten.~\ Scarcely any of the
quotations from the Old Testa
ment which occur in the New,
are taken precisely in their ori
ginal sense and connexion. They
may be classed, in general, under
three heads: (1.) Those which
have an analogous meaning, like
the words which follow from
the prophet Habakkuk, in which
a particular faith in God is
identified with that faith in
Christ which is the general con
dition of the Gospel, or, as in
E 4
56
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
[CH. I.
9 ATTOKa\v7Trerai yap opyrj Oeov OLTT ovpavov iiii Tracrav 18
aSiKiav avOpdwcav ro>v TT)I> akridtiav iv dSi-
KOL
the quotation respecting the faith
of Abraham, in chap, iv., where
every one will admit that " the
New Testament lies hidden in
the Old." (2.) Verbal allusions,
such as Matth. i. 15. 17., " Out
of Egypt have I called my son ;"
"Rachel weeping for her chil
dren." (3.) Passages from the Old
Testament taken figuratively and
typically, such as 1 Cor. ix. 9. :
"Thou shalt not muzzle the ox
that treadeth out the corn," or
Gal. iv. 25., where Agar and
Sinai are the image of the two
covenants. In this class of in
stances there is often a connected
symbolical meaning, as in 1 Cor.
x. 1 11., where the temptations
of the Israelites in the wilder
ness shadow forth the tempta
tions of the Corinthian Church.
The Epistle to the Hebrews fur
nishes a system of such sym
bols derived from the history
and ceremonial of the Old Testa
ment.
Most of the quotations in the
Epistles of St. Paul belong to the
first of these three classes, a few
of them to the third. Like the
other writers of the New Testa
ment,, the Apostle detaches them
from their context. He seems
hardly to have thought of the
connexion in which they ori
ginally occurred. He quotes as
persons in the present day might
quote, who are unaccustomed to
the critical study of Scripture.
His aim is to seize the common
spirit of the Old Testament and
the New ; to bring forward that
side of the Old Testament which
is the anticipation of the New.
Hence he rarely dwells on simi
larity of words, but on passages
which speak of forgiveness of
sins, of the nearness of God to
man, of faith counted for righ
teousness.
The age in which St. Paul
wrote was remarkable for its
fragmentary use of ancient writ
ings. The Rabbis quoted single
verses from the Old Testament,
without regard to their connexion ;
and a similar mystical use was
made of Homer and Hesiod by the
Alexandrian writers, who cited
them in single lines as authorities.
In modern times the force of a
quotation is, in like manner, sup
posed to consist in the authority
that is adduced. It is an appeal
to a revered name.
But another notion of the force
of a quotation must also be al
lowed. A striking passage from
Shakspeare appositely cited does
not necessarily impress us with
any weight of authority ; if the
words themselves are appro
priate, no matter in what con
nexion they occur. So in quaint
usages of Scripture in the writ
ings of Bacon, Fuller, or any
of our old divines, it may be
often rather the dissimilitude
than the resemblance of the ori
ginal and adopted meaning that
gives them their true force. One
of the most striking uses of an
cient sayings is their adaptation
to express new thoughts ; and
the more familiar the old sense,
the more striking and, as it
were, refreshing the new one.
Something of this kind is true
of modern no less than of ancient,
of sacred as well as of profane
writings. It is an element that
VER. 18.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
57
is For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against
all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hinder
must be allowed for in the inter
pretation of Scripture. When
men heard the truths of the
Gospel drawn forth from the
treasury of the Psalms and the
Prophets, their feeling must have
been one of surprise ; they would
greet the familiar sound and
marvel that they, for the first
time, saw its meaning. The
words which they had so often
repeated, which, like the cere
monies themselves, had been a
mere ceremonial, had a new life
breathed into them. The mode
in which this new truth was
drawn out and elicited was not
analogous to any critical or
intellectual process ; rather it
might be compared to the manner
in which the poor appropriate
to themselves the warnings or
promises of Scripture, led by
some hidden law of association or
spiritual influence which makes
them wiser than the learned.
The evidences or reasons by
which men were induced to
accept the truths veiled to them
in " dark sayings of old," might
be summed up in one the
witness of their own spirit. For
a fuller discussion of this subject,
see "Essay on the Quotations in
the Writings of St. Paul from
the Old Testament."
6 c)g $/<ccuoc *" TTIGTEWC, but the
just. ] The LXX. have EK 7r<or6u>e
juov. Hab. ii. 4. Heb. by his faith.
The English Version translates,
"The just shall live by faith,"
which is the natural mode of
connecting the words in the ori
ginal passage. It is not, how
ever, quite certain, and not very
important to determine whether
here and in the parallel passage,
Gal. iii. 11., the Apostle intends
the words e/c Triffrewg to be taken
with SixatoQ or with //o-erat,
whether the just by faith shall
live, or the just shall live by faith.
Whether ^aerai would be used
thus absolutely may be doubted.
Compare Gal. iii. 12.
The theme of the Epistle has
been already stated in the quota
tion from Habakkuk. In the
eighteenth verse we enter on its
first division, the subject of which
is the world as it existed before
the revelation of the righteousness
which is of faith and also co
exists with it. It is subdivided
into two parts, the Gentile and
Jewish world, which here as
elsewhere (compare iii. 19.) are
not precisely separated. Through
out the first chapter the Apostle is
speaking of the Gentiles ; but it
is not until the seventeenth verse
of the next chapter, that we are
made clearly aware that he has
been speaking of the Jews. To
both he holds up the law as
the mirror in which the human
race should see itself, as he had
himself learned to condemn him
self by its dictates.
The point of view in which
the Apostle regards the heathen,
is partly inward and partly out
ward ; that is to say, based on
the contemplation of the actual
facts of human evil which he saw
around, but at the same time
blending with this, the sense
and consciousness of sin which
he felt within him. The Apostle
himself had been awakened sud
denly to the perception of his
own state : in the language of
58
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. I.
KaTyovT(j)v, Sum TO ywcTTov Tov dcov (frcLvepov icrnv IP 19
6 0eo$ yap aurots e<^a^e^wcre^. ra yap aopara 20
this chapter," the wrath of God
from heaven " had been revealed
in him; "the righteousness of
God, which is by faith " in Jesus
Christ, had been also revealed
in him. Alive without the law
once, he had become conscious
of sin and finally sensible of de
liverance. And now transferring
the thoughts of his own heart
to an evil world, he tries it in
like manner by the law of God
and nature: it seems to him to
be in the first stage of the great
change, to have knowledge and
to be self-condemned. The know
ledge of God it always had latent
in the works of creation ; and
now it has fallen below itself
and is convicted by itself. It is
true that the Apostle, like all
other teachers, supplies from
within what did not consciously
exist in the mind of man. What
he sees before him, might have
seemed to another as nothing
more than a dead inert mass of
heathenism and licentiousness.
But there are two lights by
which he regards it : first, the
light of his own experience, which
seems to stir and quicken it into
life ; secondly, the light of God s
law, by which, when brought
near to it, it is condemned, and
thus enters, as it were, on a new
epoch, condemned and forgiven
at once.
18. yap, for. ] Either : (1.) as
proving the whole by the part,
for one aspect of the righteous
ness of God, or of the prepara
tion for the kingdom of heaven,
is revealed in the anger of God
and self-condemnation of men ;
or, (2.) with stress on a
iv. 16.
t, for " God no longer suf
fers every man to walk in his
own way."
air ov par ov, from heaven.] Ei
ther, " because the Lord s house
is in heaven," or with an allusion
to the suddenness of lightning; or
better, a figure of speech, partly
taken from the Day of Judgment,
" the Son of man coming in the
clouds." Matth. xxiv. 29.; 1 Thess.
Perhaps intended to
comprehend both Jew and Gen
tile, although in what immediately
follows the Apostle is speaking of
the Gentiles only. Compare the
stress laid on irag in Rom. ii. 9.,
iii. 20., x. 11, 12.
Ko.Teyj( )VT(i)v.~\ The word Kari-
Xftv is used in the New Testa
ment in two senses : (1.) in that
of "keep, hold fast," as in 1 Cor.
xi. 12.; 1 Thess. v. 21. ; or, (2.)
in that of "hinder, restrain," as
in Luke iv. 42. ; 2 Thess. ii. 6.
So in this passage we might say,
either upon all unrighteousness
of men who hold the truth, or
who hinder the truth, in unrigh
teousness. The first explanation
would seem to agree with the
context, as the Apostle is speak
ing of men sinning, not against,
but with light and knowledge.
But the word Karl^eir rather
means to hold fast than merely
passively to retain, and it would
be unmeaning to say of the hea
then that they "held fast the
truth in unrighteousness." We
might say, " hold fast that which
is good," 1 Thess. v. 21.; "hold
fast the traditions," 1 Cor. xi. 2. ;
" hold fast the confession," Heb.
x. 23. ; but not hold fast that
VER. 19,20.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
59
19 the truth in unrighteousness ; because that which * is
known of God is manifest in them; for God* manifests
20 it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the
which was only held passively
and uncertainly. The simpler
interpretation is better, " of those
who hinder the truth by unrigh
teousness." The words thus be
come an epexegesis merely of tnl
19. diori TO yrujoTOJ , because
that which is known ] Where
there is no law, says the Apostle,
there is no transgression. In like
manner it might be said, that
where there is no knowledge of
God, there is excuse. But this
is not the case of the heathen.
What can be known of God is
manifested in them, for God him
self makes it manifest. E<f>aveptt)ffr 9
Aorist in a general statement.
The heathen knew the truth,
and did not know it. They had
the elements of knowledge, but
not knowledge itself. As the
laws of nature, though unknown
to man, existed from the first ; so
did the God of nature, though un
known to man, exist before the
worlds. Yet how can that be
termed knowledge which was ig
norance ?
The Apostle is speaking, not
from within the circle of the
heathen world, but from with
out. He is describing what he
felt respecting them, not what
the heathen felt respecting them
selves. Yet the strain which he
adopts, might have received con
firmation from the writings of
" their own prophets," and have
found an echo in the better mind
of the age itself. He brings them
into the presence of nature, " the
heavens declaring his glory, and
the firmament shewing his han
diwork," and condemns them be
fore it. There was a witness in
the world, that might have taught
them, and seemed intended to
teach them, which contrasted with
the human idols of Greece, and
with the winged and creeping
things of Egypt and the East. It
does not follow, that individuals
among them could separate them
selves from the ties of habit and
education, and read the lesson
spread before them. Yet even
thus, it was a condemnation of the
existing polytheism.
20. rd yap aopaTCL aurov, K. r. \. }
for the invisible things, &c.j
may be taken in four different
ways : either, (1.) his attributes,
which, since the creation of the
world, are invisible, are seen by
his works ; a thought, however,
contrary to the usual language of
Scripture, in which the works of
creation are regarded as the mani
festation, not as the concealment
of the Divine glory ; or, (2.) bet
ter, like the expression in xvi.
25.: pwrilptOV o eo-iyj^utVoj yjpovoiq
aittvloiff the things unseen "from
the beginning," without any ex
press reference to the creation of
the world having concealed them;
or, (3, 4.) otTTo KriffewQ KOfffjLov may
be taken, not with aopara, but
with KaOoptirai, and balanced with
TO~IQ TTOiri/JlCKTU VOOVfJif.Va, 0.7TO
marking either the time or the
source whence the invisible
things are seen either by or ever
since the creation of the world.
Compare Arist. de Mundo, ch.
6. : 7ra.fffi Si rjry (pvae
60
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
[OH. I.
avrov O/JTO /cTLcrews KocrfJiov TOIS TTon^acru voovptva Ka~
BopOLTOLl, T! T CU SlO? OLVTOV SlW/X,l9 KOL 0LOTr)S, CIS TO CU CU
avrovs avairoXoyiJTOVs, Sidn yz oVres TOP 6ebv ov^ a>s #0^ 21
a?r
/caOoparat.] The things
that are unseen are seen by know
ledge of his creatures ; seen " in
the mind s eye," by creation.
Compare ii. 1. for a similar play
of words.
elg TO Civai CLVTOVQ
.] They were without excuse,
because they were confronted by
this knowledge. Compare John,
iii. 19. : " This is the condemna
tion, that light is come into the
world, and men loved darkness
rather than light, because their
deeds were evil." The knowledge
which the Apostle attributes to
the heathen in the following
verse, is in some degree a figure
of speech : without them were
the means of knowledge, but
within the eye was darkened, that
seeing they should not see, and
hearing they should not under
stand. Knowledge and action,
reason and will, are to ourselves
fundamental distinctions which
have permanently impressed
themselves on human thought
and speech. But there was a time
in the earlier stage of Greek
philosophy, in which virtue was
said to be knowledge, and vice
ignorance. A similar inversion
of our ordinary modes of thought
occurs also in Scripture. Know
ledge and obedience, light and-
life, are sometimes distinguish
ed from each other, at other
times identified. Hence it is
not surprising that a degree of
ambiguity should arise in the
Scriptural use of the word know
ledge, when employed to signify
two ideas so different as know
ledge, or the possibility of know
ledge in the abstract, as in this
passage, and knowledge unto
life.
The sense in which they knew
and did not know, admits of
another illustration from the
workings of conscience, which
may further remind the student
of Aristotle s Ethics, of the dis
cussion which is entered upon
by the great master, of another
form of the Socratic opinion.
There are moral as well as spi
ritual truths, which we know
and we do not know ; know at
one moment and forget the next ;
know and do not know at the
same instant ; for our ignorance
of which we cannot help blam
ing ourselves, even though it
were impossible that we should
know them ; and which, when
presented to us, work conviction
and sorrow for the past. And
so if St. Paul be judging the
heathen from his own point of
view rather than theirs, he is
also holding up before them a
picture, the truth of which, as
they became Christians, they
would themselves recognise.
It is natural to ask of whom
St. Paul is speaking in this de
scription ? What class among the
heathen had he in his thoughts
when he said, they knew God,
and worshipped him not as God ?
He is not speaking of the vulgar
certainly, nor yet of the educated
in the highest sense ; that is, not
of the true wisdom of heathen
VER. 21. J
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
61
creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood
by the things that are made, even his eternal power and
21 Godhead ; so that they are without excuse : because that,
antiquity, but of the sophist, the
mystic, the Athenian ever desi
rous to hear some new thing ; the
Greek in the cities of Asia ; the
Alexandrian Jew mingling all
opinions, human and divine, in
his system of knowledge, falsely
so called ; the half-educated, on
whom the speculations of Stoics
or Epicureans exercised a kind
of secondary influence ; the tra
ditional lore of Egypt, enhanced,
doubtless by the fame of its
new learning, which seemed so
strangely to contrast with the
meanness and grotesqueness of
its superstition. These were the
forms of heathen life and philo
sophy with which the Apostle
must generally have come in con
tact, which it is, therefore, rea
sonable to suppose that he had in
view in this description.
It is a further question, how
far St. Paul was acquainted with
those master-pieces of heathen
learning which have exerted so
great power on the thoughts of
men. Had he read Plato, or
Aristotle, or the writings of the
Stoics ? Can we suppose him to
have heard of Seneca, with
whom his name is connected by
an ancient and widely received
forgery ? Is it of these that he
says : " affirming they were wise,
they became fools ? " There is
no reason to suppose that St.
Paul was skilled in any Greek
learning but the Alexandrian
philosophy, and that rather as a
current mode of thought of his
time than as a system which he
had especially cultivated. But
as little reason is there to suppose
that unless he had ceased to be
himself, he would have viewed
these great classical works in
any other way than he regarded
heathen literature in general,
or have received them in the
spirit of the later Fathers, as
semi-inspired works, or have re
cognised in them the simplicity
or grand moral lesson which has
preserved them to our time. Sa
cred and profane literature fly
from the touch of each other;
they belong to two different
worlds. Nor is it likely that
the first teachers of Christianity
would have sought to connect
them, nor conceivable to us how
the Gospel could have converted
mankind, if, in its infancy, it
had to come into collision with
the dialectics of Plato, or the se
vere self-control of the Stoic. It
must gain a form and substance
of its own, ere it could leaven
the world. Afterwards it might
gather into itself the elements
of good in all things. Nor is
there reason to think that it
could have drawn to itself the
nobler spirits of heathen anti
quity, any more than it could
have taken from them. Had
Tacitus known ever so much
of that "exitiabilis superstitio,"
is it natural, humanly speaking,
to suppose that he would have
bowed at the foot of the cross ?
21 Biort yvovrts roy Sear, be
cause when they knew God,~\ is a
repetition in the concrete of
what had been previously stated
in the abstract in verse 19. The
62
EPISTLE TO THE EOMANS.
[CH. I.
fj rjv^apio-rrjo-av, dXX
s CLVTWV, KOL lo-KOT
Kap8ia. <j)dcrKOVT$ elvai crcx^oi e
TT)Z> Sofcu> TOT) a(j)0dpTov 0ov iv
TOV OLv6p(i)TTOV KO,l 7TTLV(*)V K
Sto 1 77apeSa)/cez> avrovs 6 #eos e> rcus
1 Add al.
v rots
rj dcrweros OLVTMV
KOL T^fXXafaz 22
ei/cd^o? <f)0ap- 23
KOI
/cap-
ish,
merely erred.
Judith, vi. 8.
same thought is heightened in
ver. 23. 25. 28. 32. as the conse
quences are also thrice repeated
in ver. 24. 26. 27. 2931. A
similar " antistrophic " structure
is traceable in vii. 7 24. and
viii. 1 11., and elsewhere.
v^ were made fool
or were made nought, not
2 Sam. xxiv. 10. ;
Comp. v. 22.
] conceits, as com
monly in the LXX. in a bad
sense, Ps. xxiii. 11., cxxxvii. 19.
iffKoriffdrj rj CLVVVETOQ aiiriZv Kap-
c)m.] Either their heart was dark
ened so that it became foolish, as
in Sophocles, T&V GUV a.$epK-a)i>
d/x/xarwv rrj-wfJitroQ ; or Matt. xii.
13., diroKaTeffradr) (/ XP) i>yo;e
we ij uX\rj : or better, their foolish
heart was yet further dark
ened.
The senselessness of the hea
then religions and their worship
pers, was an aspect of them far
more striking to contemporary
Jews or Christians than to our
selves. We gaze upon the frag
ments of Phidias and Praxiteles,
and fancy human nature almost
ennobled by the "form divine."
Our first notions of patriotism
are derived from Marathon and
Thermopylae. The very anti
quity of heathenism gives it a
kind of sacredness to us. The
charms of classical literature add
a grace. It was otherwise with
the Jews and first believers.
They saw only "cities wholly
given to idolatry," whose gods
were but stocks and stones, de
scribed in the sarcasm of the
prophet, " The workman maketh
a graven image."
22. tyaaxovTeg elvai <ro0ot, pro
fessing to be wise,"] is a con
tinuation of the idea already im
plied in $ia\oyicr[jio~ig. Comp.
1 Cor. iii. 20. : Kvpiog yivuffKei
TOVQ ^ lCL\OyiffjJiOVQ Ttol <700WJ , OTl
Eial paraioi, which are quoted
from Ps. xciv. 11., where, how
ever, the two words ruv votyuv do
not occur in the original. The
Scripture is ever repeating to man
the lesson that the wisdom of this
world is foolishness with God.
It is a part of the contrast which
the Gospel presents to the ex
perience of mankind. The rich
are poor, the learned ignorant,
the strong weak, the living dead,
the things that are as though they
were not in the sight of God.
The more they assert their exist
ence, the less have they a true
existence before him. There is
an irony in sacred as well as
profane writings, which inverts
the order of things, and, with
drawing from the world around,
places itself above human opi
nions by placing itself below
them.
VEB. 2224.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
63
when they knew God ; they glorified him not as God,
neither were thankful ; but became vain in their imagi-
22 nations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Pro-
23 fessing * to be wise, they became fools, and changed the
glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made
like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed
24 beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore l God gave them
up to uncleanness in* the lusts of their own hearts, to
1 Add edso.
a(j)dapTov Seou,] contrasted with
(bdaprov av0joa7rov.
23. kv o^uoiti^art.] So in Ps.
CV. 20. ?/XAaajTO iv o^iotw^art.
In such passages the use of the
preposition eV may be explained
by a confusion of rest and motion
(; //\Xttaj &(TTt f/Vai kv o^uotw^uart) ;
or better, the object may be re
garded as that in which the
change consists. Compare v. 25.
<f)6apTov avdpuTTOv . . . KO.I tpiri-
rwv.] The former words refer
to the Greek anthropomorphism,
such as we may imagine the
Apostle gazing upon from Mars
Hill ; the latter to the symbolism
of Egypt and the East, the wor
ship of the ibis, apis, serpents,
crocodiles.
24. <Hio TTt/pecWgy.] The same
connexion between the blindness
of the understanding, and fleshly
sins, occurs in Eph. iv. 18, 19.
Having the understanding dark
ened, being alienated from the
life of God through the ignorance
that is in them, because of the
blindness of their hearts : who,
being past feeling, have given
themselves over- unto lascivious-
ness, to work all uncleanness with
greediness."
TrapiduKev, gave them up.~\ Ori-
gen and several of the Fathers
soften the meaning of the word,
TrapedwKEr, by interpreting c merer,
permitted to be given over, rather
than delivered over. Such ex
planations are not interpretations
of Scripture, but only adaptations
of it to an altered state of feeling
and opinion. They are " after
thoughts of theology," as much
as the discussions and definitions
alluded to above, designed, when
the question has begun to occupy
the mind of man, to guard against
the faintest supposition of a con
nexion between God and evil.
So in modern times we say God
is not the cause of evil : he only
allows it ; it is a part of his
moral government, incidental to
his general laws. Without con
sidering the intimate union of
good and evil in the heart of man,
or the manner in which moral
evil itself connects with physical,
we seek only to remove it, as far
as possible, in our language and
modes of conception, from the Au
thor of good. The Gospel knows
nothing of these modern philoso
phical distinctions, though revolt
ing, as impious, from the notion
that God can tempt man. The
mode of thought of the Apostle
is still the same as that implied
in the aphorism : " Quern Deus
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
H. I.
Siwv avTwv ei? aKaOapcriav TOV aTiju,de<T$ai ra
avTOJV iv avTOig *, OITWC? //.er^XXaf ai> TT)^ d\TJ0iav TOV 0eov 25
5 ^ I /O* \ 5 /"I / /I ^ *\ ^ ^
e^ TO yevoei KOLL ecrepacrurjcrav /cai \aTpevo~av TT?
Trapd TOV KTiO~avTa, os io-Tiv euXoy^ros ets TOV?
d/xi^. Sea TOVTO TrapeSajKev avTovs 6 0e6s et? 7701^7 26
dri/xta? * ac re yap 0jj\iai CLVTCOV fjiTyjX\aav TTJV (frvcriKrjv
ei5 TT)^ Trapa <$>vo-w, o^oidis e /cat 01 apcrei e? 27
es TT)Z/ (frvcriKrjv -^prjcrLV TT^S ^Xeta? e^tKavOrjo-av iv
opefet avTa>v ets dXX^Xov?, dpcreves iv apcrecriv Trjv
rjfjioo~vvrjv KaTepya^ojjievoL Kal Trjv avTLfjao diav r^v eSei
7r\dvrj<; avTcov iv eavTols aTroXapfidvovTts. Kal Kadcos 28
ou/c l8oKLp.acrav TOV Oeov ^(LV iv iiriyvtoo-ei, T
o Oeos els dSoKiov vovv, TTOitlv ra LL K
vultperdere, prius dementat." To
preserve this is essential, or we
shall confuse what the Epistles do
say, and what we suppose that
they ought to have said ; the
words used to express the opera
tion of the Divine Being, and the
general impression of Divine good
ness which we gather from Scrip
ture as a whole.
kv TO.IQ !7Ti0uju/cue, in their state
of lust; compare kv ry 6pt &t, v.
27.
etc aKadapcriav TOV artjuafco-flai.]
Not to the uncleanness of disho
nouring which would require TYJV
before aKaSapyiav ; in the lan
guage of the old grammarians,
X|0i^, or ZvEKa, may be supplied
or to speak more correctly the
genitive is used to signify the
remoter object which, at the same
time, is an explanation of aKadap*
oiav. For the word arijuci0 0cu,
in this sense, compare the expres
sion which occurs in 1 Thess. iv.
4., KTcLffdctL ffKEVOQ kv TtfJ,rj.
The general question, how far
God is spoken of in Scripture as
the Author of evil, will be dis
cussed on Rom. ix. One remark
may, however, be made by way
of anticipation, that while we
reject the distinction of God
causing and permitting evil as
unsuited to Scripture, a great dif
ference must, nevertheless, be
admitted between sin as the pe
nalty of sin, or, as we should say,
the natural consequence of sin,
and sin in its first origin. In the
latter sense the authorship of evil
is no where attributed to God ;
in the former, it is. God makes
man to sin, in the language of
Scripture, only when he has al
ready sinned, when, to the eye of
man, he is hopelessly hardened.
In this point of view, the meta
physical difficulty, which is not
here entered upon, still remains ;
but the practical one is in a great
degree removed.
21 28. are worth observing,
as illustrative of the style of St.
Paul, consisting as they do of a
VER. 2528.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
65
25 dishonour their own bodies between themselves : who
changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped
and served the creature rather* than the Creator, who
26 is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave
them up unto vile affections : for* their women did
change the natural use into that which is against
27 nature : and likewise also the men, leaving the natural
use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward
another ; men with men working that which is unseemly
and receiving in themselves that recompence of their
ss error which was meet. And* as they did not like to
retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to
a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not con-
thrice repeated statement of the
sin of the heathen, and their pu
nishment. 21 24. : They knew
God, but worshipped idols, there
fore God punished them with
unnatural lusts. 25 27. : They
turned the truth of God into a
lie ; therefore men and women
alike were given over to sensual
abominations. 28. to the end :
They would not know God; there
fore God took away from them
the sense of knowledge. Then
follows the description of their
state in its last aggravation.
25. omvc /uerr;XXaav. J A new
aspect of idolatry ; it changes the
truth that God teaches about
Himself (dX//fota Seov) into a
lie.
Tra.pa.Tov KTitravra^ and not the
Creator. The preposition Trapa.
is here used in the sense of
"rather than," as frequently
with comparative expressions,
such as, ciXXog, tripos. So 1
Cor. iii. 11., 6ejj.i\tov aXXov
St. Paul to what has preceded.
At the mention of such things,
he utters a hymn of praise, lest
the honour of God should seem
impaired. Compare iii. 5., for a
similar feeling ; also ix. 5.
26. 6)i\eiat and apaeveQ rather
than avdptQ and yvralKe^ be
cause of the relation of sex in
which the Apostle is speaking of
them, etc; Tradrj artju/ac, to affec
tions of dishonour, with an allu
sion to aTtfJia^effdai which has
preceded.
27. 6yUO/WC C> KCti ol Uf)(TeVeQ.~\
These words may be connected,
either with what follows or with
what precedes ; either as in the
English translation ; or, "And so
the men ; leaving the natural use
of the women, they burned in
their lust," &c.
OQ EffTtv i/Xoy//roc.] The doxo-
logy expresses the antipathy of
VOL. II.
not a recompense of
their sin with one another, but of
their error respecting God.
28. KciO&G OVK: ESoKtf.ia.ffai .^ The
original meaning of the word
SoKipaeiris : (1.) to try as metals,
or, in a figurative sense of public
66
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. I.
crr) dSi/aa, Ka/aa, Trowqpia, TrXeo^efia 1 JJLZ- 29
6vov, <f)6vov, epiSos, SdXov, KaKorjdeias t//i6 lyHcrrdg* so
/caraXdXovs, OeocrTvyels, vfipicrTas, V7rep7)(j)dvovs, dXaoVa?,
Iffyevperas KCLKCOV, yovevcrw aTret^et?, dcrwerovs, do-viperous 31
acrropyovs 2 , dz eXeT^u-oz ag, olrt^es TO SiKauojua rov #eoi) eVi- 32
, on 01 ra rotavra Trpdcrcrovrts d^tot 9avdrov etcrt^,
1 Add iropveia, and read Ka/ctoi after
2 Add
30. ^tflvpiorue,] secret, as op
posed to KaraXaXovc, open slan
derers.
Sfoorvyelc, hated of God.~\ The
use of the word in classical Greek,
as well of the analogous word
fipoTOffTvyrjQ, requires the passive
sense. To this it is objected, that
it is unmeaning to single out a
particular class as hateful to God,
because all sinners are so. With
the view of avoiding this dif
ficulty, it has been proposed to
render the word actively after
the analogy of S-eo/ao^e in Arist.
Aves, 15c5.
/J.KTU 5 a-rravTas rovs beovs, us olffQa <rv.
v^j r bv At &ei 5r?
officers ; (2.) to approve on trial ;
(3.) to determine, think fit, as in
Thucyd. ii. 35., and more common
ly, and with less idea of the ori
ginal signification, in later Greek.
In the present passage it may be
translated, " Who did not think
fit." There is also a Trapovopacria
with a^ojajuoe, which in English
is hardly translatable. Not ap
proving to have God in their
knowledge, they become repro
bates ; or, because they did not
discern to have God in know
ledge, God gave them over to an
undiscerning mind. Other in
stances of TrapovofJLaffla in the
Epistle are, ii. 1., iii. 27., and,
above, v. 26. So Christ himself,
Matt. viii. 22., xvi. 12.
29. 7TE7r\Y)p<.OfJlErOVQ TTCLIT^ dfilKlfy
. . . TTovr/p/a.] For similar lists of
sins, compare Gal. v. 19. ; 2 Tim.
iii. 3. ; the order in which they
are placed, seems sometimes to
follow associations of sound,
sometimes of sense.
Troj^jO/ci] may be distinguished
from KaKiy 9 as the stronger and
more exact expression from the
weaker and more general one, as
villany from evil and vice.
TrXeovefr a,] perhaps here, as in
Ephes. v. 3., Col. iii. 5., in the
sense of lust.
Kafcorjfa/ae, malignity, ] implies
secret, inveterate evil in a man s
nature.
Compare also the word
in Arist. Vesp. 418. and
in Philo, vol. ii. 642. ; also Rom.
viii. 7. Notwithstanding this de
parture from ordinary use, the
word is still somewhat pointless.
It is safer, with such a writer as
St. Paul, or rather with all writers,
to take language in its usual sense,
of which we are much more cer
tain, than we can ever be of the
intention of a writer in a particular
passage. Here, either the active
or passive sense is deficient in
point ; yet a fair meaning may
be given to the passive usage.
$eoaTvyf) does not signify hateful
to God in the same degree that
all sinners may be said to be so,
VBR. 29 32.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
67
29 venient ; being filled with all unrighteousness, evil, wick
edness x , villany*, covetousness ; full of envy, murder,
30 debate, deceit, malignity ; whisperers, backbiters, hated*
of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil
31 things, disobedient to parents, without understanding,
covenant-breakers, without natural affection 2 , unmerciful :
32 who knowing the judgment of God, that they which
1 Add fornication.
Add implacable.
but more than this, " reprobate,"
" marked with the seal of the
Divine wrath," in a special sense
and pre-eminently above other
men " hated of God."
vptffrdg, brutal and injurious
to others.
V7rp770a ove, haughty.
dXa^d^af, vain boasters, ] the
Gnathos and Thrasos of the
comic writers.
30. etyevpcTag KaKwv, inventors
of new forms of evil. Compare
K cu-wj tvptrai in Philo, Lib. in
Flac. 520.
affvverovQ, without under
standing,^ in the Hebrew sense
implying moral degradation. Ps.
xci. 6.
arrropyovQ, without natural af-
fection, ] e. g. mothers who ex
posed their children, emperors
or satraps who put to death their
brothers.
avvrdtrovc, perfidious.~\ Jer.
iii. 8. 11.
[ao-TTo^ove, in the Textus Re-
ceptus, is probably spurious, per
haps a gloss on aavv^irovq. ]
32. The Apostle concludes the
long catalogue of sins as he had
begun it, with a reference to the
fact that men committed them
in the face of knowledge ; they
could not otherwise have had the
nature of sin. It has been some
times thought that a higher de
gree of guilt was intended to be
intimated by ffwevdoKovaiv, " have
pleasure in them," than by Trpacr-
ffovcri, " do them." To encourage
evil in others without the in
centive of passion in a man s self,
might seem to denote a higher
degree of moral depravity than
any mere licentiousness w r hich
was the gratification of passion.
It may be objected to the sug
gested interpretation that the
thought is too subtle, and also
that a stronger meaning is as
signed to the word avrEvdoxoixn
than it will fairly bear. There
is a considerable difference be
tween passively assenting to or ap
proving, and encouraging or tak
ing delight in. The climax breaks
down if we translate the words
in their legitimate sense, " who
not only do, but assent to those
who do them." Nor is the climax
appropriate at all in this place,
nor can it be maintained, as a ge
neral proposition, that it is worse
to approve than to do evil.
The difficulty has led some in
terpreters to propose a change
of reading, which has considerable
manuscript authority. The va
rious readings are as follow :
TOV eov f<-
r 2
68
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. I.
ov JJLOVOV aura Trocovcrw, aXXct /cat crwevSo /cover iv roc?
Trpdcrcrova-us.
[Add OVK ivoriaav, AGfgv. Cypr.
IMG.~\ OTL Ol TO. TOtaVTCL TTpUff-
atot SCLVCLTOV elvir,
TTOiovaiV, A.C&.G
rec, Bfgv~\j aXXa KOI avvtvloicov-
tnv AC&G [<rvvfu3o/coiT>/r6c] rolg
7Tpaff(rovffiv. If we combine the
alteration of B with the addi
tion of A6r, the sense will be as
follows : " Who, knowing the
judgment of God, do not perceive
that they who do such things are
worthy of death, not only in that
they do them themselves, but in
that they consent to those who
do them." The feebleness of the
last clause, and the deficiency of
MS. authority, are sufficient ob
jections to such a mode of evad
ing the difficulty.
Another explanation has been
offered of the original text, aw-
fvdoKovffiv, it has been thought,
is not intended to express any
higher degree of guilt than TTOI-
ovffiv, but merely that the Gen
tiles do evil, and judge favourably
of evil. This it is sought to
connect with the first verse of
the next chapter : " Therefore
thou art inexcusable, O man,
whosoever thou art that judgest,
VEE. 32.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
69
commit such things are worthy of death, not only do
the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
and thy judgment of another
is a condemnation of thyself ;
for thou judgest and doest too."
But the transition of meaning
from ffvvtvloKiiv to Kpivetv is not
defensible.
It has been already remarked,
that the form of St. Paul s writ
ings is often more artificial and
rhetorical than the thought. May
not this be the explanation of
the passage which we are con
sidering ? The opposition is
really one of particles, not of
ideas. The Apostle does not
mean to say " who do them, and,
more than that, have pleasure in
those that do them," but simply
"who do them, and assent to
those who do them." (Compare
2 Cor. viii. 10., o mvce ov
TO irotfjffai, a\\a icai TO
irpoevrjpZaffde cnro irepwi, which
is probably to be explained in
the same way* and where the
commentators have recourse to
similar forced interpretations.)
He is aggravating the picture by
another, but not necessarily a
deeper shade of guilt.
F 3
70 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
ON THE CONNEXION OF IMMOKALITY AND
IDOLATRY.
" AN idol is nothing in the world," says the Apostle ; " yet he
that commits fornication sins against his own body." It is foolish
ness to bow to an idol ; but immorality and licentiousness are real
and essential evil. No mere outward act can make a man different
from what he was before, while no inward act can leave him the
same after as before its performance. A belief about Jupiter or
Hades is not necessarily inconsistent with truth and purity of life.
The evils, whether of a heathen or of a Christian country, are not
always associated with the corruptions of religion. Whence, then,
the connexion often spoken of by theologians, and not unfelt by the
heathen themselves, between immorality and idolatry ?
It is first to be sought for in their origin. As the Christian
religion may be regarded as the great pillar and rock of morality,
so the heathen religions sprang up in an age prior to morality.
We see men in the dawn of human history just raised above
the worship of stocks and stones, " making themselves gods to go
before them." Like children they feed upon the creations of their
own minds ; they live in a world of their own and are satisfied.
No thought occurs to them of the higher laws of human life ; they
have no sense of shame or its opposite ; the abstract terms for
" right and wrong " have not yet been heard in their vocabulary.
The Gods who have possession of the heart of man are half-physical,
half-magical, and in part also human, beings, not purely evil any
more than man himself, but leaning to the worse rather than to the
better side of man s nature, of which they are the vacant and mag
nified images. The deities of the Homeric poems are not better
than men, but rather worse ; compared with heroes, they have a
fainter sense of truth and justice, less certainly of moral greatness.
After ages felt that the Homeric gods were unworthy of a civi-
CONNEXION OF IMMORALITY AND IDOLATRY. 71
lised race. And yet it might have been fortunate for mankind
had no deeper leaven of evil ingrained itself in the religions of
the ancient world ; for mythology at a later, or in some nations
at an earlier, stage, dived into a gulf below, out of which rose
powers of evil furies pursuing the homicide, inevitable destiny,
capricious vengeance, wild justice for imaginary crimes. Human
nature grew and human beings spread over the earth ; but they
carried with them, wherever they went, the traditional load of
superstition, with which their separate existence as a nation seemed
to be bound up. Far otherwise would it have been if the good of
states, or the dictates of natural feeling and affection, had been made
the standard to which religion was to conform. And accordingly it
has everywhere happened, that as reflection has gained ground, or
civilisation spread, mankind have risen up against the absurdities
and barbarities of early mythology, either openly disowning them or
secretly explaining them away ; and thus in either case bearing
witness that idolatry is not on a level with man s reason, but below
it. In the case of the Greeks, especially, many of the grosser forms
of religion disappeared from the light of day into the seclusion of
the mysteries.
The whole civilised world in modern times are worshippers of an
unseen God ; the whole civilised world in ancient times were idola
ters. The vastness and uniformity of this latter fact lead us to look
upon idolatry as rooted in a natural instinct. It is not an error
into which men reason themselves, or a lesson propagated by false
teachers, or the trick of priests imposing on the credulity of man
kind ; a lower stage of human nature is implied in it. Its birth and
origin we scarcely see ; most of the effects which are commonly
attributed to it being an after-growth of civilised and historical
times. And this of itself was an element of immorality ; it con
tinued in a world which had lost its first meaning, whose convictions
of right and truth gradually became opposed to it, whose very ideas
of decency were inconsistent with its grosser forms. In old times
r 4
72 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
man had wondered at his own power of bringing into being a
creature in his own image ; religious awe had blended with the
sensual impulse ; at shrines and sacred places " the people had come
together to eat and to drink, and risen up to play." And, ever
after, sensual love remained as a pervading element of the Pagan
religions, consecrated by antiquity, in later ages graced and half-
concealed by art. The introduction of the Bacchanalia at a com
paratively recent epoch in the history of Greece, and the attempted
introduction of them at Rome, indicate the reawakening of the same
religious passions when older modes of faith failed to satisfy them.
Yet more monstrous forms of evil arose when in things not to be
named men seemed to see a likeness to the operations and powers
of nature. The civilised Greek and Roman knew well that there
were frenzies of religious licentiousness unworthy of a rational
being, improper and dangerous for a government to allow. As East
and West met and mingled, the more did these strange rites spread
themselves, passing from Egypt and Phoenicia to Greece, from the
mountains of Phrygia to the streets and temples of Rome.
But, besides this direct connexion between idolatry and forms
of moral evil, there is also an indirect and general influence which it
exercised, even in its better aspect, adverse to morality. Not from
religion, but from philosophy, come the higher aspirations of the
human soul in Greece and Rome. Idolatry detains men in the
world of sight ; it offers an outward form to the eye and imagery
to the fancy ; it draws the many-coloured veil of art over the cor
ruption of human nature. It heals the strife of man with himself
superficially. It takes away the conscious want of the higher life, but
leaves the real need. But morality has to do with an unseen world:
it has no form nor comeliness, when separated from the hope which
the Gospel holds out ; it is severe and stoical in its demands. It tells
men to look within ; it deepens the battle with self. It presents
duty almost as an abstraction which in the face of death they must
pursue, though there be no reward here, though their name perish
for evermore. The spirit of all idolatry is the very opposite of this ;
CONNEXION OF IMMORALITY AND IDOLATRY. 73
it bids men rest in this world, it pacifies them about another. The
nature of God, who is the ideal and perfection of all morality, it
lowers to the level of man ; the virtue which is above, the truth
which is beyond us, it embodies in the likeness of the human form,
or the wayward and grotesque fancies of the human mind. It bids
us seek without for what can only be found within.
There remains yet a further parallel to be drawn between immo
rality and idolatry in the age in which St. Paul himself lived, when
the ancient religions had already begun to be discredited and ex
plained away. At this time they had become customs rather than
beliefs maxims of state rather than opinions. It is, indeed, impos
sible to determine how far in any minds they commanded respect, or
how much of the reverence that was refused to established modes of
worship was accorded to the claims of newly imported deities. They
were in harmony with the outer world of the Roman Empire that is,
with its laws, institutions, traditions, buildings ; but strangely out of
harmony with its inner life. No one turned to the mythology of
Greece and Rome to find a rule of life. Perhaps no one had ever
done so, but now least of all. Their hold was going or gone ; there
was a space in the mind of man which they could no longer fill up,
in which Stoic and Epicurean philosophers were free to walk; the chill
darkness of which might receive a ray of light and warmth from the
Alexandrian mystic ; where, too, true voices of philosophy and ex
perience might faintly make themselves heard, and the heart ask
itself and find its own solution of the problem, "What is truth?" In
all this latter period the relation of morality to religion might be said
to be one of separation and antagonism. And, upon the whole, this
very freedom was favourable to right and truth. It is difficult to
determine how far the spectacle of a religion which has outlived its
time may corrupt the moral sense, how far the necessary disbelief of
an existing superstition tends to weaken and undermine the intellec
tual faculties of mankind ; but there can be little doubt that it does
so less than if it were still believed and still ministered to the sensu
ality or ignorance of the world.
74 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
ON THE STATE OF THE HEATHEN WOELD.
NOT to dwell at length on a subject from which the Christian gladly
turns away, it will not be without use, as an illustration of the pre
ceding chapter, to sum up briefly a few of the leading features which
distinguish the heathen from the Christian world; most of which
have never existed in Christian times, and which we have no rea
son to think ever will or can exist again as prevailing practices
in a Christian or civilised society.
1. TlaiSepaffTia and in general unnatural crimes.
2. Exposure of offspring.
3. Licentiousness of religious worship, as shown
i. In the representations of the theatre, where the worst parts
of the heathen mythology were publicly performed.
ii. In the mysteries, especially those of Cybele and of Ceres
and Bacchus, which consisted partly of a frantic licen
tiousness, partly of a consecration of those things which
are done in secret by mankind.
iii. In the religious ceremonies of Egypt and the East, espe
cially the worship of Cotytto, Astarte, Isis, and Mendes.
4. Cruelty, as shown not merely in maxims or practices of war or
the crimes of individuals, but in the offering of human sacrifices,
which continued to the age of the Emperor Adrian.
To which may be added, as less revolting characteristics of
ancient times,
1. Slavery ;
2. Condition of women: both of which are gradually ameliorated
by Christianity.
STATE OF THE HEATHEN WORLD. 75
The picture suggested by these features is not equally true of the
heathen world in all ages, nor of Greece and the East, nor of Rome
and Greece, nor of Rome itself in the earlier years of the republic
and under the emperors. In the Iliad and Odyssey the fouler
Greek vices are found, if anywhere, only among the Gods : while the
Greek Lyric and Elegiac poets are deeply infected with them. Old
Italian life was simpler and better. It could hardly have been the
mere fond recollection of the past that made the Roman tell of the
Sabine morals of his ancestors, or of the dignity of Roman matrons,
or of the lessons of truth and virtue to be gathered from the examples
of consuls and dictators. It is probable that Rome was long preserved
from the impurities of Greece and the East, yet, as it seems, only
reserved for a deeper contamination and pollution. To see the old
world in its worst estate we turn to the age of the satirists and of
Tacitus, when all the different streams of evil coming from east,
west, north, south, the vices of barbarism and the vices of civili
sation, remnants of ancient cults and the latest refinements of luxury
and impurity, met and mingled on the banks of the Tiber. What
could have been the state of society when Tiberius, Caligula, Nero,
Domitian, Heliogabalus were the rulers of the world ? To a good
man we should imagine that death itself would be more tolerable
than the sight of such things coming upon the earth.
Strange it seems, at first sight, that anything of good, or patriotism
or noble feeling, anything of purity in women or manliness in men,
should have subsisted side by side with shameless indecency and
impurity. Living, mingling, acting in this world below nature, were
men like Seneca, Tacitus, or Agricola, of whom it might be truly
said, " these not having the law are a law unto themselves." The
explanation of this anomaly is, perhaps, to be sought in the fact, that
in the worst of times good men are better and more entirely separated
from the vices of their age. At the same time it can hardly be
supposed that they could have regarded the sins which the Apostle
describes with that natural horror that they would awaken among
ourselves. The feeling which makes the perpetrator of such sins an,
76 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
outcast and an exile upon the earth had as yet no existence: shameful
as they were admitted to be, they could still be made the subject of a
jest or of a poetical allusion. Nor must the extreme confusion be
overlooked which religion had introduced into the natural sense of
mankind respecting them, consecrating them by the example of gods
and heroes, and representing even the worst of them as religious
mysteries. Least of all would the increase of refinement tend to their
diminution. It was not to the elegant and luxurious senator such
abominations were peculiarly odious, but to the antique Roman, rude
in speech and knowledge, hating the contamination of foreign
manners, lingering in thought around the liberties of the republic.
Two reflections naturally append themselves on this subject. The
first, that as St. Paul tells us that the Gentiles knew or might have
known the truth of God, so there never was a time at least in the
history of Greece and Rome, with which we are best acquainted
in which nature and reason did not bear witness against these im
purities. Plato and Socrates in their way, and Aristophanes in his,
alike protested against the degrading vices of their age ; the first by
endeavouring to give a nobler and more spiritual character to that
which to Christian ideas is absolutely incapable of being associated
with anything true or spiritual ; the latter, while admitting the uni
versality of such vices, by making them subjects of ridicule and
satire, and also to a certain extent claiming for himself the praise
of greater decency than his contemporary comic writers. In the
times of the emperors the lash of the satirist gave no quarter to the
depravity of the age ; while the historian, and better men generally,
remembered the tradition of a time when purity and decency of
manners had not yet been lost, and the Stoic philosopher, if his
stoicism were not a mere mask, stood apart, naturally compelled
to an austere virtue by the vices of all mankind.
The other is a sad reflection, which we would feign conceal from
ourselves, and yet cannot avoid making, when contemplating the
glorious Athens, its marvels of art and beauty, its deeds of patriotism,
its speculations of wisdom and philosophy ; not, perhaps, without the
STATE OF THE HEATHEN WORLD. 77
thought flashing across our minds that there was a phase of human
life in that old Paganism which in Christianity has never been deve
loped in equal perfection, and from which truly Christianity may be
said to have borrowed something which it has incorporated with
itself. The reflection is this : That if the inner life had been pre
sented to us of that period which in political greatness and in art is
the most brilliant epoch of humanity, we should have turned away
from the sight with loathing and detestation. The greatest admirer
of old heathen virtues, the man endowed with the finest sensibilities
for beauty and form, would feel at once that there was a great gulf
fixed between us and them, which no willingness to make allowance
for the difference of ages or countries would enable us to pass. There
are vices which have existed in modern times to afar greater extent
than in ancient ; there were virtues in ancient times which have
never been exceeded ; but there were vices also which are not even
named among us. It is a sad but useful lesson, that the noblest
simplicity in art may go along with
" Hank corruption mining all within."
Neither is it untrue to say, that there was a thread by which they
were linked together.
78 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
CHAP. II.
THE second chapter of the Romans has often been regarded as con
taining the exclusive condemnation of the Jew for hypocrisy, as the
first chapter contains the condemnation of the Gentile for sins below
nature. This statement, however, is not quite exact. That the
Apostle intended to include both Jew and Gentile under sin, may
be inferred from chap. iii. 9. ; the two heads of the proof do not,
however, precisely correspond to the divisions of the chapters. The
course of his thought may be traced as follows : He has been speak
ing of the inhuman and unnatural vices of the Gentiles, and now
passes on to another class of sins hypocrisy and deceit, in which
he loses sight of the Gentiles, and addresses man in the abstract.
Assuming that all mankind are guilty before God, the judgment of
others is a condemnation of self. But whence is this assumption ?
Not strictly deducible from the preceding chapter, in which the
Apostle has been speaking only, or chiefly, of the Gentiles, yet in
spirit agreeing with it ; for the judgment of others is a higher
degree of that knowledge of God which " hinders the truth in un
righteousness." Still there is a link wanting. We must allow the
Apostle to make a silent transition from the Gentile to mankind in
general, just as in chap. iii. 19. he has included the Gentile under
the condemnation of the Jew. Full of the general idea of the univer
sal sinfulness of man, he follows his own thought without looking
back at the connexion. There would have been no difficulty had he
spoken first of the sinfulness of the Gentile and then of the sinful-
ness of the Jew ; and, thirdly, of the additional guilt incurred by
either in hypocrisy and judgment of others. But the sinfulness of
SUBJECT OF THE EPISTLE. 79
the Jew being greatly increased by or mainly consisting in this last,
he has sunk the mention of other sins, leaving them to be inferred or
suggested from the general description that preceded.
With the first verse of the second chapter the style changes ; the
contemplation of the heathen world is ended, and the Apostle pro
ceeds to reason with an imaginary opponent, whom he draws within
the circle of human evil and will not allow him to escape, under the
pretence of judging others, which does but aggravate his guilt. Such
a one is trying to deceive God, but only deceives himself. Gradually
we approach the Jew. In the third verse there is a glimpse of the
notion that God would judge the heathen but spare the sons of
Abraham ; in the fourth and fifth verses is presented to us a picture,
like those in the Old Testament, of the rebellious spirit of the Jew,
and the long-suffering of God towards him ; in the tenth and eleventh
verses occurs a declaration of God s equal justice to all ; in the
twelfth and thirteenth the spirit of the law is opposed to the letter,
and the believing Gentile to the unbelieving Jew ; until at last, in
v. 17., the Apostle turns to make the direct attack on the Jew, for
which, in the previous verses, he has been indirectly preparing :
" But if thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law and glories t
in God."
Throughout this paragraph, as elsewhere, the connexion is in a
great measure formed by the repetition of words in the successive
verses and clauses. Thus Trpao-owrae and Kplpa connect verses 1.
and 2. ; TOVQ TCI rotavTa trpaaffovrag is taken up from v. 2. in v. 3. ;
in the latter part of v. 4. TO *xpn (JT v T v $ v * s a repetition of rov
TT\OVTOV rijg xprjffTOTrjToe in the former part of the verse; ug cnroSwffei,
K.T.X.J in v. 6. is an expansion of the word SiKatoKpicriaQ in v. 5. ;
Soa e <cat njuj), in the tenth verse, is a resumption of the same words
in the seventh.
80
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. II.
ALO d^aTToXoy^ro? el, <3 avOpcoTre Trag 6 Kpiva>v eV (5 2
yap Kpivzis TOV erepov, (reavrbv AcaTaKpu>is ra yap avra
Trpacrcreig 6 Kpivatv. oiSajJiev ort TO Kptp,a TOV Oeov 2
/cara a\rj0iav eVi rov? ra rotavra Trpacrcro^ras
Se TOUTO, e5 avOpame 6 Kpivuv rov ra rotavra 3
ical iroi&v aura, ort crv K(j>evr) TO /cpi/xa TOV
rov TT\OVTOV TTJS xpyo-TOT^TOS auToO /cat TT?S a^o- 4
rrjs lAaKpodvfjiias Kara^po^ets, ayvo&v on TO
Oeov
Aio] appears to have a double
reference in the context: first,
to what has preceded, " Because
of this revelation of wrath and
mercy, because of this universal
sinfulness, because of this just
judgment of God;" secondly, to
what follows, " therefore thou art
without excuse, because in con
demning others you are con
demning yourself." A conclusion
which is bound up by a further
link: "For thou that judgest
doest the same things." For a
similar use of 10 . . . i, as here,
CLO . . . iv $ yap, comp. Heb.
xiii. 12.: Sio KOL l^^ovc "tra.
ay taffy fiia rov ith ou afyiaroe rov
Xaoj , e w rj/c TrvXyg kiraQev.
Comp. i. 20. for ava^o\6yr]TOQ ;
for the play on Kpivus and
c. V. 16. Kplua e
2. ota/iv 5e.] But although
you judge others and deceive
yourself, God will judge you as
you really are. e implies an
antithesis to the general idea of
the preceding verse, " You are a
hypocrite, but you cannot deceive
God."
Kara d\7/0fta^,] not according
to their judgment of themselves,
but according to truth.
3. c) again adversative to the
preceding verse : " But do you
think this, O man, that your
judging others will give you a
claim of exemption from the Di
vine judgments ? That would
not be according to truth. Do
you suppose that you will be
judged by anything but what
you are ? "
Hypocrisy is almost always
unconscious ; it draws the veil
over its own evil deeds, while it
condemns its neighbours ; it de
ceives others, but begins by de
ceiving the hypocrite himself.
It is popularly described as " pre
tending to be one thing, and do
ing, thinking, or feeling another ; "
in fact, it is very different. No
body really leads this sort of unna
tural and divided existence. A
man does wrong, but he forgets
it again ; he sees the same fault in
another, and condemns it; but no
arrow of conscience reaches him,
no law of association suggests to
him that he has sinned too. Hu
man character is weak and plastic,
and soon reforms itself into a de
ceitful whole. Indignation may be
honestly felt at others by men who
do the same things themselves ;
they may often be said to relieve
their own conscience, perhaps,
even to strengthen the moral sen
timents of mankind by their ex
pression of it. The worst hypo
crites are bad as we can imagine,
but they are not such as we
VEB. 1-4.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
81
2 Therefore thou art inexcusable, man, whosoever
thou art that judgest : for wherein thou judgest another,
thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest
2 the same things. But we are sure that the judgment
of God is according to truth against them which commit
3 such things. And thinkest thou this, man, that
judgest them which do such things, and doest the same,
4 that thou shalt escape the judgment of God ? Or de-
spisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance
and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of
imagine. The Scribes and Phari
sees, "hypocrites," were unlike
what they seem to us ; much more
would they have regarded their
own lives in another light from
that in which our Lord has pic
tured them. Their hypocrisy, too,
might be described as weakness
and self-deception, only height
ened and made more intense by
the time and country in which
they lived. It was the hypocrisy
of an age and of a state of so
ciety blinder, perhaps, and more
fatal for this very reason, but
less culpable in the individuals
who were guilty of it. Those
who said, " we have a law, and by
our law he ought to die," were not
without "a zeal for God," though
seeking to take away him in
whom only the law was fulfilled.
But although experience of our
selves and others seems to show
that hypocrisy is almost always
unconscious, such is not the idea
that we ordinarily attach to the
word "hypocrite." This sin
gular psychological phenomenon
is worth our observing. The
reason is, first, that the strong
contrast we observe between
the seeming and the reality,
between the acts and words of
the hypocrite, leads us to speak
VOL. II.
as though the contrast was pre
sent and conscious to himself.
We cannot follow the subtle
mazes through which he leads
himself; we see only the palpable
outward effect. Secondly, the
notion that hypocrisy is self-
deception or weakness, is inade
quate to express our abhorrence
of it. Thirdly, our use of lan
guage is adapted to the common
opinions of mankind, and often
fails of expressing the finer
shades of human nature.
4. rj rov TrXovrov.] Or is it that
you openly defy God ? The con
nexion with the previous verse
may be traced as follows: What
account do you give of yourself,
O man ? Do you expect to es
cape ? or is it that his mercy
hardens your heart? It is this
mercy in delaying to punish, that
gives you the opportunity of self-
deception. How different are
your feelings to Him from His to
you ! Comp. Eom. ix. 22. : " What,
if God, willing to shew his wrath,
and make his power known, en
dured with much longsuffering
the vessels of wrath fitted for
destruction!" The thought of
Divine vengeance in both pas
sages, shades off into that of mer
cy. In the Apostle s view, it is not
82
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. II.
rov Oeov ets /x,ercu>oiai> ere ayei ; Kara Se TTJV 5
o"K\rjporr)Toi crov KOLL d/xera^d^TO^ Kapiav Orjcravpi^eLS
opyrjv eV r}p,epa opyrjs KOL a7TOKaXvi//ea)s otfcaio-
TOV 0eov ; 09 aTroSwcret eAcacrrft) Kara ra ejpya 6
avrov, rots ^tv KaO* vTropovfy epyov ayaOov S6av KO! 7
Kal d<j)0apo~iav fyjTovo-iv faty aivviov rois Se e 8
they are almost an exact
quotation from Psalm Ixii. 12.,
Prov. xxiv. 12., and are repeated
in the New Testament in Matt.
xvi. 27., xxv. 31.
It has been asked, what does
the Apostle mean by saying that
we shall be judged by our works,
when the whole tenor of the
Epistle goes to prove that we are
to be justified by faith ?
Many answers may be given
to this question : First, the
Apostle has not yet taught the
doctrine of righteousness by
faith, and therefore cannot pro
perly adopt what in modern times
might be termed the language of
Pauline theology. He is speak
ing exoterically, it might be said.
in words borrowed from the
Old Testament, on the level of
Jews, or heathens, not of Chris
tians, from the same point of
view as in 9, 10. Secondly,
the words ra c pya in this pas
sage are not opposed to faith, but
to pretensions, self-deceptions,
and may be paraphrased in the
expression that follows vTro/noy^v
tjoyov dyaQov. But thirdly, the
Apostle needs these excuses to
make him consistent, not with
himself, but with some of his in
terpreters. He says, indeed :
" We are justified by faith with
out the deeds of the law." But
he uses other language also :
" Now abideth faith, hope, love ;
and the greatest of these is love."
Nor does the expression " righte-
God s severity that punishes, but
his goodness that for a time puts
off the punishment. Comp. for
the language, Phil. Leg. Alleg. p.
46., ri]v vTrep&oXjjv TOV TT\OVTOV
KOI rfJQ dyadoTYfTOQ avrov.
5. Once more, de is adversative,
though the opposition is too faint
to be exactly expressed by any
corresponding particle in English.
The impenitence and hardness of
man s heart is contrasted with
the goodness and gentleness of
God. The contrast may be car
ried out, either with or without
a question. " And as thou art
hardened and unrepenting, thou
treasurest up for thyself (or dost
thou treasure up for thyself?)
wrath in the day of wrath." The
present is used for the future
(comp. below, ver. 16.); or rather
the day of judgment is thought
of as already present. The idiom
is similar in the words of our
Saviour, Matt. vi. 20.: Srr)<rav-
pi%T* t vfuv Srjffavpovg EV ovpavw.
The word $r)<ravpiere in the pas
sage we are considering, contains
an allusion to TOV TT\OVTOV rr/e
The
wrath of God and the righteous
ness of God are already revealed,
i. 16, 17., iv. 25. ; but there is
yet a further stage of revelation
in which the sons of God are to be
manifested, Rom.viii. 19., and the
justice of God finally vindicated.
oe aTro^wo ei e/caoTw, K. T. \. These
words are an epexegesis of I
YEB. 58.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
83
God leadeth thee to repentance ? But after thy hard
ness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself
wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the
righteous judgment of God ; who will render to every
man according to his deeds : to those who patiently *
endure in a good work, seeking for * eternal life, glory
and honour and immortality : but unto them that are
ousness by faith" occur at all
in several of his Epistles. We
may not " straiten " the Apostle
where he is not " straitened " in
his own writings. There are oc
casions on which we can conceive
him using the language of St.
James as a corrective to the abuse
of his own. A subject so vast
and various as the salvation of
man, cannot be bound within the
withs of logic. As with our Lord,
so with his Apostles the mes
sage is, first " Believe, and thou
mayesfc be saved ; " but secondly,
" The hour is coming, and now
is, when they that are in the
graves shall hear his voice."
It is the strongest presumption
that the difficulty is not a real
one, that the Apostle himself is
wholly unconscious of it : we
cannot imagine him discussing
whether faith in Christ, or
the love of Christ, or the in
ward life of Christ, are the
sources of justification. Is it
irreverent to say, that disputes
of this kind would hardly have
been intelligible to him? No
more can we conceive him re
garding the case of the heathen,
after, as well as before, Chris
tianity, in any other spirit than,
" God is no respecter of persons."
7. There are three possible
ways of construing this passage :
(1.) As in the English transla
tion, " To those who by patient
continuance in well doing, seek
for glory and honour and im
mortality, he will render eternal
life." This is favoured by the
order of the Greek, but seems
open to the objection of an an
ticlimax. It is hardly good
sense to say "God will give
eternal life to those who ask him
for the greatest conceivable bless
ings;" but rather "God will
give the greatest conceivable
blessings to them that ask for
eternal life." The stronger ex
pression has a false emphasis, un
less it refers, not to what man
asks, but to what God gives.
Or (2.) the order of the words
may be varied by taking epyov
dyadov either with viroporij^ or
c)oav. It is better, however, to
take it with V7ro^ow}v, as the
expression oav epyov dyadov
is singular, and the words ep
yov dyadov cannot be connected
equally with rtprj^ /ecu dtydapcriar.
(3.) To those who by patient
endurance in a good work seek
for eternal life, he will render
glory and honour and immortality.
This mode of taking the passage,
notwithstanding the inversion of
the order, is on the whole pre
ferable, and is favoured by the re
petition of 3oa /cat ri^i], in ver. 10.
8. Tolg Se e eptfc/ae.] The
word epideia is derived, not from
a 2
84
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. II.
Kal
rfj dXyOeia, Tret^o/xeVots Se rfj
aSi/aa, opyrj KOI 0v/xo9. 2 #Aii//is Kal crTtvoyupia Irrl Tracrav 9
^fv^f]v dvOptoirov TOV Karepyatfl^vov TO KOLKOV, lovSatov
re TTpuTov Kal EXkrjvos Soa Se Kal TI/X//) /cai elprjvyj 10
l r<w epyao/xeV<w TO dyaOov, JovSatw re TrpuTOV
Ov yap Icrrw Trpo<TtoTTO\ f r)i\fia irapa
ocrot
pis but from epi0oc, and its ori
ginal meaning signifies labour for
hire. A secondary signification
is hence obtained of "intrigue
for hire ; " and in Aristotle s
Politics, v. 2. 6., the word has ac
quired a further sense of " party,"
" faction." This last has been
probably modified in the New
Testament by the supposition of
a second derivation from epic, as
we should be inclined to infer
from the juxta-position in which
the word occurs in Gal. v. 20.
tpeic;, rj\oi 9 S vjuot, epidelai, 2
Cor. xii. 20., James iii. 16.
aTTetOovffL rjjf cc XrjQe/a.J By tho
truth is meant the law of right,
and the will of God generally.
The ideas of truth and right are
not separated in Scripture, as they
are in our way of speaking, or in
the forms of thought of the Greek
Philosophy. There is no " divi
sion of the soul," in Aristotle s
language, into moral and intel
lectual. Hence, knowledge in
Scripture is often spoken of as
a moral quality, and with the
word " truth " are associated ex
pressions denoting acts and states
of the will rather than of the in
tellect. See i. 20.
The construction is changed,
perhaps, because the words opyri
and ^vjj,o did not suit the previ
ous verb. This change occasions
Kal opyf].
the Apostle to repeat another
parallel clause in the tenth verse.
^V/JLOQ is distinguished from opyi)
by some of the lexicographers, as
the more transient from the more
permanent feeling. But the last
thing that the Apostle thought
of when accumulating words, is
the precise shade of meaning by
which one may be distinguished
from the other. The second is
really a rhetorical strengthening
of the first, as two words, even if
synonymous, always mean more
than one.
fTEidojJLe^OLQ e Tft ddiKiq.,"] who
disobey the law of God and make
unrighteousness their law. Com
pare 1 Cor. xiii. 6. for a similar
contrast of clauses.
9. $\1\l>i KCU crrero^WjOta.J Com
pare 2 Corinth, iv. 8. SAio-
JJIEI OI, CtXV OV ffTVO-%U)pOVfJ.VOl I
where the words are opposed,
as a less degree of tribulation
to a greater.
The parallelism of the clauses
is best preserved by arranging
them with Lachmann in four
members, with a full stop af
ter SVJJIOG. Here, as elsewhere,
repetition adds emphasis; the
thought which is first conceived
in ver. 7, 8., is fully and dis
tinctly enunciated in 9, 10.
^ V X ) V ] maybe used here, either
as the seat of the feelings, as in
VEB. 912.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
85
contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey un-
9 righteousness, indignation, and wrath. Tribulation and
anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the
10 Jew first, and also of the Gentile ; but glory, honour,
and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew
first, and also to the Gentile.
12 For there is no respect of persons with God. For
our Lord s words "My soul is
exceeding sorrowful even unto
death," Mark, xiv. 34. ; or simply
for "person " as in Rom. xiii. 1.
" Let every soul be subject to the
higher powers."
lovSaiov TE Trpwrov Kal "E\-
XT/ roe.] The Jew as the type
of the world, is the first recipient
of God s mercies and of his judg
ments.
11 15. In the verses which
follow, the Apostle involves reason
within reason, as at ver. 17. of ch. i.
All men shall have their reward,
(1.) for God is no respecter of
persons ; (2.) for with or without
law the wicked shall alike perish ;
(3.) for not the hearers, but the
doers of the law shall be righte
ous with God ; (4.) for the Gen
tiles, if they be doers of the law,
shall be approved in the day of
the Lord. (1.) is a general truth
which is the foundation of what
has preceded, and of which (2.)
may be regarded as the conse
quence in fact, and the proof to
us ; (3.) is a negative statement
of it and a proof of so much of
(2.) as relates to the Jew, and (4.)
a further proof by contrast of so
much of (2.) as relates to the
Gentile, and a strengthening of
the general principle by a parti
cular instance.
11. ov yap effTiv TrpoffuTToX^ia.^
Compare Acts, x. 34., where, in
reference to the admission of the
Gentiles, Peter says : " Of a truth
I perceive God is no respecter of
persons. But in every nation
he that feareth him and work
eth righteousness, is accepted of
him, " Eph. vi. 9. ; Col. iii. 25.,
where the same truth is applied
to the relative duties of masters
and slaves.
It was one of the first ideas
that the Israelite had of God, that
he was no respecter of persons :
Deut. x. 17. ; 2 Chron. xix. 7. ;
Job, xxxiv. 19. But this dis
regard of persons was only in his
dealings with individuals of the
chosen people. St. Paul used the
expression in the wider sense of
not making a difference of per
sons between Jew and Gentile,
circumcision or uncircumcision,
bond or free, just as he adapted
the words " there is one God " to
the meaning of God one and the
same to all mankind, in iii. 30.
and elsewhere. Nothing could be
less like the spirit of his country
men than this sense of the uni
versal justice of God. Still it
might be asked of the Apostle
himself, how the fact of their ever
having been a privileged people,
was consistent with the belief of
this equal justice to all mankind.
Like many other difficulties, we
can answer this by parallel diffi
culties among ourselves. Though
living in the full light of the Gos
pel, there are many things which
G 3
86
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. II.
Kai ocroi
yap dv6jJLa)$ rjfjiapTov, avo^ais Kal o/TroXoiWai
iv vofjito ruJLaprov, Sea VOJJLOV KpiOrjcrovTai* ov yap ol 13
aKpoaral i>o/xov l Si/caioi Trapa [ra>] #ea> aXX 01 Troirjral
^ S(,Kma>#77croi>Tai (6Vaz> yap 0vrj ra pf) vo^ov lcira 14
<f)v<Ti, ra TOV vopov iroLtocrw 3 , OVTOL vopov
eavrois eicriz/
omi es e^eiK^v^rai TO epyov TOV 15
ypanTov lv Ta?s KapSiais avT&v,
Trjs crv^ei87jcrea)9 Kal /xera^u dXX^
rj Kal aTroXoyov/xeVa)^) e^ rjpea 7 4 Kwti 6 16
2 TOV v6fAOV.
TOG v6}JLOV.
to us also "God hath put in his
own power," and which we believe
rather than know to be recon
cilable with his justice. What to
us the heathen are still, standing
apparently on the outskirts of
God s moral government, that to
St. Paul and the believers of the
first age were " the times of that
ignorance that God winked at."
Are we not brought by time to a
later stage of the same difficulty ?
12. ay 01 yap dvojuwc fi/JLapTor.^
For God will deal alike with all ;
He will punish without law those
that sinned without law, and
judge by the law those that sin
ned under the law. Not "he
that knew not his Lord s will,
shall be beaten with few stripes : "
this though true is not to the
point here, but " the soul that
sinneth it shall die."
eV vo/zw.] The preposition
may be equally well rendered in
English, "in," "with," " under ; "
none of these, however, precisely
give its meaning*, which is rather
"in the state or sphere of the law "
a metaphorical use of kv derived
from the original local one.
13. For not every one who
says Lord, Lord, the hearer of
the law, boasting his descent from
3 iroifj. * Sre.
Abraham, is just before God, but
the doers of the law shall be jus
tified. The future, here and in
ver. 12., is used like the present
in a general statement, as in Matt.
IV. 4. oiiK CTT ctjorw juovw //<7rcu b
avdpuTToc ; as in English, "he who
does so will suffer punishment ;"
or, perhaps, as expressing the in
tention of Providence or nature.
The Apostle here speaks of
the doers of the law as to be jus
tified, and yet a few verses after
wards, he himself intimates that
by the deeds of the law no flesh
shall be justified. Again, this
contradiction may be illustrated
by an analogous way of speaking
among ourselves. The heathen,
we say, are without the pale of
salvation, and yet we acknow
ledge that individual heathens
are nevertheless saved.
14 16. are commonly inclu
ded, as by Lachmann, in a paren
thesis, which, for reasons that will
be stated at ver. 16., is not here
admissible ; ver. 14. is closely
connected with ver. 13., of which
it forms an indirect proof. " It
is not the hearers, but the doers
of the law who are justified, for
the Gentiles are sometimes jus
tified who know not the law."
VEB. 1316.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
87
as many as sinned* without law shall also perish
without law: and as many as sinned* in the law
13 shall be judged by the law ; for not the hearers
of the law are just before God, but the doers of
H the law shall be justified ; for when the Gentiles,
which have not the law, do by nature the things con
tained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law
15 unto themselves : which shew the work of the law
written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing
witness, and thoughts accusing or else excusing them
IG one with another *; in the day when God shall judge
may either be taken
with TTOLwtTLv as in the English
Version, or with vopov (.yovra.
" When the Gentiles who have
not the law by nature or origi
nally." The latter mode of con
struing the passage is in some
degree confirmed by Gal. ii. 15.
ijfielQ fyvffti lov^atoi : Eph. ii. 3.
TeKva fyvffet. opyfJQ : and v. 27.
ii ix fyvffewQ afcpov<m o. fe 0vr/, not
" Gentiles," but " the Gentiles,"
as in ch. xi. 12, 13., and else
where.
iavroiQ Eialv r6jjioq.~\ Compare
Arist. Eth. iv. 14. : 6 tie
HOQ v avrw.
15. O ITIVEQ, which show.~\ Who
manifest the reality of the law ;
or who manifest the law not in
word, but in act ; which, un
written though it be, is written
on their hearts. Compare 2 Cor.
iii. 2. " Ye are our epistle written
in our hearts, known and read of
all men." OITLVEQ = quippe qui.
avpfj.aprvpovffrjg, ] sc. rw ro/zw,
awf.il{](TEWQ. The act rather than
the faculty of conscience in the
sense in which the term is used
by moral philosophers.
u.] Not as in the Eng
lish Version, " meanwhile," but
with a\\n\(i)i 9 " one with an
other," as in Matt, xviii. 15. :
^v ffov KIU avrov JUGVOV. aXA.//-
refers, not to Xoy 107*0)1 , which
would be too violent a personifi
cation, but to avrwj .
?) ecu] is well translated in the
English Version " or else ; " it
merely expresses the connexion
of the two alternatives.
The 14th and 15th verses con
tain an analysis of the natural
feeling of right and wrong, in
three states or stages. First,
the unconscious stage, in which
the Gentiles not having the law,
show its real though latent ex
istence in their own hearts ; of
which, secondly, they have a
faint though instinctive percep
tion in the witness of conscience ;
which, thirdly, grows by reflec
tion into distinct approval or
disapproval of their own acts and
those of others.
"Blessed are they, who fall
into the hands of this accuser,"
say the Rabbis ; " blessed also
are they, who fall not into his
hands," quoted from Sohar, Exo
dus, fol. 67. col. 266., by Schrett-
gen, vol. i. p. 496.
a 4
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. II.
o$ ra KpvTTTa TUV OLv9p(!)TTtov Kara TO evayye XioV /xov Sid
Irjcrov xpicrrov. ei Se l cri) lovSaios eTro^ojLta^ Kal eTrcwa- 17
u?7 vo^a) 2 Kal /cav^acrat > 0e< /cat ywwcrKets TO fleX^/xa 18
i SoKi/x,aeis ra Sta^epoz/ra, Kar^ov/xej/os IK rov popov,
TToi^ag re creavTov o8rjybv el^at Tu^>Xa>^, <^>ws ra>i> ez 19
cr/coret, TraiSeimyz a<f)p6va)v 9 SiSaovcaXo* vrpiluv, eovTa 20
16. A difficulty occurs in the
construction of this verse, the
future ?/ /CjOtyfl being joined
with the present IvSa /cwn-cu, or
as some interpreters think with
KCLTr)yOpOVVT(*)V and CtTToXoyOV fJ.-
vwv. The English Version has
inclosed ver. 13 15. in a par
enthesis, to escape the difficul
ty; an expedient which it has
frequently adopted, as at ch. v.
1318.; Eph. iv. 9, 10., but
which is peculiarly unsuited to
the unravelling of the tangle of
discourse, in such a writer as
St. Paul. The thread of any
broken construction may in this
way be resumed ; yet unless the
parenthesis really had a place in
the author s mind, our supposed
explanation will be a mere gram
matical figment like the " word
understood," in explanation of
a difficult construction. A real
parenthesis is the insertion of a
clause, or of a thought, between
two points of a sentence, the
meaning of which should be
clearly broken off at its begin
ning, and clearly resumed at its
conclusion. The parenthetical
thought, as it is hurried over in
discourse, should be really an
afterthought, yet necessary to the
comprehension of the sentence.
The present passage does not
come within this rule, and there
fore a parenthesis has no place
here. It is far more probable
that, as elsewhere, St. Paul wrote
without perfect sequence, than
that he suspended his meaning
through several verses, and re
sumed it unimpaired.
We will take the words, there
fore, in their plain but ungram-
matical construction with tv%d-
KwvTai, " which shew the work of
the law ... in the day which is
to come." The day which is to
come is not only future, but pre
sent ; anticipated in the heart
and conscience of every man, as
well as in the history of the
world. It is "the day that is
coming and now is," John, v. 25.,
the presence (Trapovffia) of Christ.
And the Apostle passes from one
tense to the other, unconscious of
the solecism.
For a parallel union of dis
similar times compare above &*?-
cravpi^eig GECLVTM opyriv kv ij^ipq.
2 Cor. i. 14. : Kad^g Kcti
ctTro jufpove, OTL
ffpev KaOairep Kal
vfjieiQ i][j,u>v iv Trj fiplpq. rov Kvpiov
Irjcrov. Eph. i. 3. : EvXoyrjroe 6
Seoe Kal Trarijp TOV Kvpiov rj/jiuiy
Irjtrov xptarov, 6 evXoyijffag r/^ac
kv Traffrj evXoyiy TrvevpctTiKr] kv
role 7rovpa.vioi iv ^purro). See
note at the end of the chapter
on the modes of time and place
in Scripture.
Kara TO evayyeXtuv p-ov, accord
ing to my Gospel.^ The Apostle
means to express that the fact of a
VER. 1720.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
89
the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gos-
n pel. But if 1 thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law,
is and gloriest in God, and knowest his will, and approvest
the things that are more excellent, being instructed
19 out of the law ; and art confident that thou thyself art
a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in dark-
20 ness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes,
1 Behold.
judgment of the world by Christ
(Rom. xiv. 10.) was in accord
ance with his Gospel, not that
his Gospel would be the rule of
judgment. It is a fancy of several
of the Fathers that he is appeal
ing in these words to a written
Gospel of his own or to St. Luke s.
1729. From this point to
the end of the chapter, the Apo
stle exerts all the force of his elo
quence to unmask the Jew. All
the imaginations with which he
flatters himself, all the titles that
he delights to heap upon himself,
are suggestive of the contrast be
tween what he is and what he
seems, which is further height
ened by the previous mention of
the Gentile who knew not the
law and did by nature the things
contained in the law, and pointed
at the conclusion by a verse from
the Old Testament. At ver. 26.
the Gentile reappears and the
order is finally inverted, uncir-
cumcision which fulfils the law
taking the place of circumcision
which transgresses the law, and
the idea of the Jew in spirit form
ing a middle term between Jew
and Gentile.
17. ei SE, A.B.D.E.K] IK is a
correction, the object of which is
to avoid the anacoluthon. The
English translation should there
fore run : " But if thou art
called a Jew." The apodosis of
the thought is sufficiently express
ed in ver. 21., though the length
of the sentence and the rheto
rical accumulation of clauses have
prevented the Apostle from resu
ming the thread of the grammar.
e indicates a subdued con
trast with what has preceded :
"There are Gentiles who fulfil
the law ; and [but] dost thou,
who hast all the feelings of a Jew
and all the pride of thy race,
break it ? " The latter thought
the Apostle expands into six
verses, from 17. to 23.
Kavyaaai kv Sew, gloriest in
God.~\ For the feeling expressed
in these words comp. Deut.iv. 7. :
"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 Psalm cxlvii. 19, 20.:
" He sheweth his word unto
Jacob, his statutes and his judg
ments unto Israel. He hath not
dealt so with any nation."
18. yivuffKeiG TO &\tyta.] Comp.
Rom. xii. 2. ; etc TO
Not " discernest the differences of
things," but approvest, or knowest
by proof, the things that are more
excellent. Compare Philip, i. 10.
elg TO loKLp.a^Eiv vp.a.Q TO. ta0-
OOVTO. ; Rom. xii. 2., where the
word SoKijiafciv occurs in the
90
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. II.
/cat
6 ovv
v TO)
tTtpov creavTov ov SiSacrjceis ; 6 KTjpvcrcro)^ 21
/cXeTrreis ; 6 \eya)v JU,T) /xoi^euet^ /xoi^eveis ; o 22
/3SeXvcra-d/xej>os ra eiSaAa lepoo-vXeis ; os ez^ ^o/xw Kavyacrai, 23
Sia TTj? 7rapa/3acrea>9 rou vo^ov rov Otbv cm/^aets ; TO yap 24
oz o/m rot) #eou Si v/xag ySXacr^/^eirat e*> rois lOvecrw,
/ca#a>s yeypaTTTai. TrepiTopr) ph yap ax^eXe?, eai j dxoz 25
same sense ; and Wisd. ii. 19.,
where it is used as here, inter
changeably with yivuffKELv.
20. tyovTO. Ti]V jUOj00w(riv.]] In
that thou hast rrjv popQtoanr, not
as in 2 Tim. iii. 5., the form as
opposed to the substance, but the
substance itself in an outward
form, the visible presence of
knowledge and truth in the law.
21. At length the Apostle turns
to strike : the thought for which
throughout the chapter he had
been preparing, is now uttered
with its full force. He cuts
short the apodosis with a ques
tion, which is also an inference :
Is the result of all this that
thou who judgest doest the same
thing ? " Dost thou," we might
repeat in the language of the
Gospels, " who art paying tithe of
mint, of rue, and of cumin, devour
widows houses ? Art thou, who
castest stones at others, free from
the sin of adultery thyself?"
6 (3c)\vffa6^et OQ t thou who ab-
horrest.~] But " how could a
Jew commit sacrilege ? " And
what opposition is there between
" committing sacrilege" and il ab
horring idols ? " The last diffi
culty might be removed by con
sidering the words "Dost thou
who abhorrest idols ? " as equiva
lent to "Dost thou who art zeal
ous for God ? " (Compare the de
scription in Joseph. Ant. xviii.
3. 1., of the horror of the Jews
at Pilate commanding the Roman
standards to be brought into Je
rusalem, and upon his refusal to
remove them, their laying their
necks bare to his soldiers ; the
passionate detestation of idols
shown on this and similar occa
sions might fairly be considered as
zeal for God.) But the other in
quiry is still unanswered: How
could a Jew rob a temple ? Va
rious instances are brought for
ward of alleged sacrilege, such as
the dedication of property by say
ing Corban, to evade the duty of
supporting parents ; or the buy
ing and selling in the Temple,
which made the Lord s house a
house of merchandise ; or, lastly,
embezzlement of the Temple re
venues, as in the case of Fulvia,
mentioned in Josephus, Antiqq.
xviii. 3. 5. But these offences,
though in a metaphorical sense
they might be termed sacrilege,
give a feeble and inadequate op
position in the present passage.
The most literal mode of taking
the words is also the freest from
objections : " Dost thou who
abhorrest idols, rob the idol s tem
ple ? " Such an offence might
be very possibly committed by a
Jew, whom no "religio loci"
would restrain ; and it would oc
cur to St. Paul, as an inhabitant
of a Gentile city, to mention it.
This explanation is confirmed by
the use of the word iepovvXovs in
VEE. 2125.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
91
which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in
>i the law thou therefore which teachest another, teachest
thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should
22 not steal, dost thou steal ? thou that sayest a man
should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery ?
23 thou that abhorrest idols, dost * thou rob temples ? thou
that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the
24 law dishonourest thou God ? For the name of God is
blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is
25 written. For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep
Acts, xix. 37., curiously trans
lated in the English Version
"robbers of churches" (compare
2 Mac. iv. 42., where it is simi
larly translated, though referring
to the Jewish temple), and by the
remarkable interpretation of Exo
dus, xxii. 28., in Joseph. Ant. iv.
8. 10. " Let no one blaspheme
those gods whom other cities
esteem such, nor any one steal
what belongs to strange temples ;
nor take away the gifts that are
dedicated to any God."
23. The sum of all these ques
tions is : " Are you who are
glorying in the law, dishonour
ing God by the transgression of
the law ? " For the language
compare Eccles. xxxix. 8., iv
vopo) 3iaO//fC7/e Kvplov Kay^f] VETCH.
24. It is not only I who say
this ; you are described in the
Old Testament. With the ex
ception of the connecting particle
yap, the words of the quotation
correspond exactly with Isaiah
lii. 5., according to the version of
the LXX., which has received a
different impress from the origi
nal. The words, however, both of
the LXX. and the Hebrew refer
alike to the dishonour done to
God, by the oppression of the
Israelites under their enemies.
The spirit of the passage, accord
ing to either version, is different
therefore from the spirit in which
it is here quoted. The thought
which the Apostle has elicited
from it " The name of God is
blasphemed, because of the wick
edness of his worshippers" is
expressed elsewhere, though not
with so near a correspondence
of language, 2 Samuel, xii. 14. ;
Nehem. v. 9. ; Ezek. xxxvi. 23.
It is a sarcasm on the chosen race
that they who are glorying in the
law are themselves the cause of
God s name being evil spoken of.
25. TrepiTOprj [lev yap wfyeXel,
for circumcision profiteth.~\ I do
not say that circumcision is vain,
if you have also " the other circum
cision of the heart." Comp. iii.
1 1 . (As we might argue, the sacra
ment is a means of grace to those
that receive it faithfully.) But
to you, and such as you, it is vain.
This is one of that class of
questions which, in ancient as
well as modern times, is seldom
brought to the distinct issue of
the Apostle. The Rabbi would
have hesitated to say that a
wicked Jew had a part in Mes
siah s kingdom, or that the vir
tuous heathen was necessarily
excluded from it. The Christian,
92
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. II.
TTpdo-crys lav Se 7rapa/3aTr]s VOJJLOV $9, 17 TrepiTOptf crov
aKpo/3vcrTia yeyovev. lav ovv rj aKpofivo-Tia ra StAcatw/jtara 26
TOV vojjiov <f>v\dcro"rjj ou^ 07 aKpo/3vo~TLa avTov 19 TTepLTOp^rjv
erai, Kal Kpuvtl rj IK <ucre<w9 aKpofivo-Tia TOV 27
reXovcra ere TOZ> Sia ypdfJLfJiaTOs Kal Trepiro/XTJs
7rapa/3dTr)V VOJJLOV ; ov yap 6 Iv TW (fravepa) lovSalos 28
lorTiVy ovSe 17 e^ TW (fravepto Iv crapKL Treptro/xT), clXXa 6 29
eV ra> KpvTTTO) lovSalos, Kal
in modern times at least, would
shrink from affirming that an
unbaptized infant is " a child of
wrath," or that the baptized could
hardly, if in any case, fail of sal
vation at the last. But many
even among Christians would
gladly, if possible, turn away
from the inquiry : they would
wish to be allowed to hold pre
mises without pushing them to
their conclusions ; to take issue
upon a word, and not to deter
mine the point of morality or
justice.
This is what the Apostle has
not done. With him circumci
sion becomes uncircumcision, if
it transgress the law. Uncir
cumcision becomes circumcision,
if it keep the law.
It is true that the spiritual
meaning of circumcision was im
plied in the law itself, and oc
casionally taught by the doctors of
the law. (Deut. x. 16.; Philo, ii.
258.) But the habitual feeling of
the Jew was the other way. To
him circumcision was the seal of
the covenant ; the charm which
protected him from the wrath of
God ; the sign which had once
been characteristic of the nation,
and was still appropriated to the
individuals who composed it. Like
the old prophets in spirit, though
in form logical and antithetical,
the Apostle answers him by assert-
ing the superiority of the moral to
the ceremonial law; he repeats
the universal lesson which the
whole current of Jewish history
tended to obliterate, the same
which was once heard in other
words from the Saviour s lips,
" Think not to say with your
selves we have Abraham to our
Father."
The following passage, quoted
from Schoettgen s Horae He-
braicse, vol. i. 499., is a singular
instance of an attempt to recon
cile the privileges of circumci
sion with the moral law : Dixit
R. Berechias, " Ne haeretici et
apostatse et impii ex Israelitis
dicant, quandoquidem circumcisi
sumus in inferiora non descendi-
mus." The Rabbi answers the
difficulty in a different spirit from
St. Paul: "Quid agit Deus,
sanctus, benedictus ? Mittit an-
gelum et praeputia ipsorum at-
trahit ita ut ipsi in infernum
descendant."
26. ta.v ovr, if then,"] is a co
rollary of the preceding verse :
" If the transgressor of the law
passes into the state of uncir
cumcision, it follows by an easy
transition that the fulfiller of the
law passes into the state of cir
cumcision."
27. KOU KptVEl f] tK (j)Vfflt)Q CLKpO-
vffTia.~\ And shall not uncir
cumcision, which is by nature,
VEB. 2629.]
EPISTLE TO THE EOMANS.
93
the law : but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy cir-
26 cumcision is made un circumcision. Therefore if the
uncircumcision keep the* judgments of the law, shall not
27 his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision ? And
shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil
the law, judge thee, who with* the letter and circum-
>8 cision dost transgress the law ? For he is not a Jew,
which is one outwardly ; neither is that circumcision,
29 which is outward in the flesh : but he is a Jew, which
is one inwardly ; and circumcision is that of the heart,
if it fulfil the law, judge you? a
further step in the inversion of
the order of the world ; not only
shall the Gentile take the place of
the Jew, but shall condemn him.
Compare Ezekiel, v. 7, 8. for
an approach to the same thought :
" Because ye multiplied more
than the nations that are round
about you, and have not walked
in my statutes, neither have kept
my judgments, neither have done
according to the judgments of
the nations that are round about
you ; Therefore, thus saith the
Lord God, Behold, I, even I, am
against thee, and will execute
judgments in the midst of thee
in the sight of the nations."
EK (J)V(T(JJG, like tyvffei in ver. 14.,
admits of two constructions : ei
ther "the uncircumcision which
is by nature fulfilling the law,"
like rjiJ-eiQ <J)Vffi lovdaiot, Gal. ii.
15. ; or the uncircumcision which
by nature, and without the law,
fulfils the law.
<re TOV c)ia jpa^LfJictTOQ KCL\ Trtpiro-
firJQ 7rapadr?7v vofjiov ;] ia the
state, or better, the instrument :
" You whom the letter and circum
cision only make a transgressor of
the law ;" "you who with all your
advantages do but transgress the
law."
28. This verse may be regarded
as the reason of what has pre
ceded : " The Jew shall be con
demned by the Gentile ; for such
a Jew as I have been describing
is not the true Jew." Or equally
as an inference from what has
preceded, or a repetition of it in
a slightly altered form. The
simplest way of construing the
passage is to make lov^aloe and
TrepiTo^)) predicates of the sen
tence " For not he that is one
outwardly is a Jew." ev vapid is
an explanation of lv TU> fyavepw.
29. The Apostle uses in a new
sense the expression familiar to
all. Compare our Lord s words
" an Israelite indeed ; " and St.
Paul in the Epistle to the Gal. vi.
16. : "Peace be upon them, and
mercy, and upon the Israel of
God." Such expressions are used
not merely because the Jewish
Church was the type of the Chris
tian, but because to the first
believers they were the natural
mode of describing the new elect
people of God.
The expression Trepiropri Kap-
c)/a occurs in Deut. x. 16., xxx.
6. ; Jer. iv. 4.
i v TT vf.vp.a.Ti^\ in the inward man,
not in the written letter. Comp.
2 Cor. iii. 6. : " Who hath made
94 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. [Cu. II.
pan ov ypafji^ar^ ov 6 7Tai^os ovK l av6p<!)TT(AV dXX IK
TOV
us able ministers of the New ceding chapters to bring Jew and
Testament, not of the letter, but Gentile under the same condem-
of the spirit ; for the letter killeth, nation. It has been also the object
but the Spirit giveth life." of the Apostle to contrast the Jew
It is the object of the two pre- with the Gentile, and to bring
29.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 95
in the spirit, and not in the letter ; whose praise is not
of men, but of God.
him to a perception of the moral the Jew does not, fulfil the law,
law by the supposition of its what profit is there m circum-
fulnlmentinthepersonofaGen- cision ? That is the question,
tile. But if the Gentile can, and See Introduction to Chap. 111.
96 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
ON THE ABSTEACT IDEAS OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT, IN CONNEXION WITH EO-
MANS, I. 17.
RELIGION and philosophy have often been contrasted as moving in
different planes, in which they can never come into contact with
each other. Yet there are many meeting points at which either
passes into the circle of the other. One of these meeting points is
language, which loses nothing of its original imperfection by being
employed in the service of religion. Its plastic nature is an element
of uncertainty in the interpretation of Scripture ; its logical structure
is a necessary limit on human faculties in the conception of truths
above them ; whatever growth it is capable of, must affect also the
growth of our religious ideas ; the analysis we are able to make of
it, we must be able also to extend to the theological use of it. Religion
cannot place itself above the instrument through which alone it
speaks to man ; our true wisdom is, therefore, to be aware of their
interdependence.
One of the points in which theology and philosophy are brought
into connexion by language, is their common usage of abstract words,
and of what in the phraseology of some philosophers are termed
" mixed modes," or ideas not yet freed from associations of time or
sense. Logicians speak of the abstract and concrete, and of the for
mation of our abstract ideas : Are the abstractions of Scripture the
same in kind with those of philosophy ? May we venture to analyse
their growth, to ask after their origin, to compare their meaning in
one age of the world and in another ? The same words in different
languages have not precisely the same meaning. May not this be
the case also with abstract terms which have passed from the Old
Testament into the New, which have come down to us from the
ABSTRACT IDEAS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 97
times of the Apostles, hardened by controversy, worn by the use of
two thousand years ? These questions do not admit of a short and
easy answer. Even to make them intelligible, we have to begin some
way off, to enter on our inquiry as a speculation rather of logic
than of theology, and hereafter to return to its bearing on the inter
pretation of Scripture.
It is remarked by a great metaphysician, that abstract ideas are, in
one point of view, the highest and most philosophical of all our ideas,
while in another they are the shallowest and most meagre. They have
the advantage of clearness and definiteness ; they enable us to con
ceive and, in a manner, to span the infinity of things ; they arrange,
as it were, in the frames of a window the many-coloured world of
phenomena. And yet they are " mere " abstractions removed from
sense, removed from experience, and detached from the mind in
which they arose. Their perfection consists, as their very name im
plies, in their idealism : that is, in their negative nature.
For example : the idea of " happiness " has come down from the
Greek philosophy. To us it is more entirely freed from etymological
associations than it was to Aristotle, and further removed from any
particular state of life, or, in other words, it is more of an abs
traction. It is what everybody knows, but what nobody can tell.
It is not pleasure, nor wealth, nor power, nor virtue, nor contempla
tion. Could we define it, we seem at first as if we should have found
out the secret of the world. But our next thought is that we should
only be defining a word, that it consists rather in a thousand unde-
fi nable things which, partly because mankind are not agreed about
them, partly because they are too numerous to conceive under any
single idea, are dropt by the instinct of language. It means what
each person s fancy or experience may lead him to connect with it ;
it is a vague conception to his own mind, which nevertheless may be
used without vagueness as a middle term in conversing with others.
It is the uniformity in the use of such words that constitutes their
true value. Like all other words, they represent in their origin
things of sense, facts of experience. But they are no longer pictured
VOL. II. H
9 EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
by the sense, or tinged by the affections ; they are beyond the circle
of associations in which they arose. When we use the word happi
ness, no thought of chance now intrudes itself ; when we use the
word righteousness, no thought of law or courts ; when the word
virtue is used, the image no longer presents itself of manly strength
or beauty.
The growth of abstract ideas is an after-growth of language itself,
which may be compared to the growth of the mind when the body
is already at its full stature. All language has been originally the
reflection of a world of sense ; the words which describe the faculties
have once referred to the parts of the body ; the name of God him
self has been derived in most languages from the sun or the powers
of nature. It is indeed impossible for us to say how far, under these
earthly and sensual images, there lurked among the primitive peoples
of mankind a latent consciousness of the spiritual and invisible ;
whether the thought or only the word was of the earth earthy. From
this garment of the truth it is impossible for us to separate the truth
itself. In this form awhile it appears to grow ; even the writers of
the Old Testament, in its earlier portion, finding in the winds or the
light of heaven the natural expression of the power or holiness of
Jehovah. But in process of time another world of thought and ex
pression seems to create itself. The words for courage, strength,
beauty, and the like, begin to denote mental and moral qualities ;
things which were only spoken of as actions, become abstract ideas,
the name of God loses all sensual and outward associations ; until at
the end of the first period of Greek philosophy, the world of abstrac
tions, and the words by which they are expressed, have almost as
much definiteness and preciseness of meaning as among ourselves.
This process of forming abstractions is ever going on the mixed
modes of one language are the pure ideas of another ; indeed, the
adoption of words from dead languages into English has, above all
other causes, tended to increase the number of our simple ideas,
because the associations of such words, being lost in the transfer,
they are at once refined from all alloy of sense and experience.
ABSTEACT IDEAS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 99
Different languages, or the same at different periods of their history,
are at different stages of the process. We can imagine a language,
such as language was, as far as the vestiges of it allow us to go back,
in its first beginnings, in which every operation of the mind, every
idea, every relation, was expressed by a sensible image ; a language
which we may describe as purely sensual and material, the words of
which, like the first written characters, were mental pictures : we
can imagine a language in a state which none has ever yet reached,
in which the" worlds of mind and matter are perfectly separated from
each other, and no clog or taint of the one is allowed to enter into
the other. But all languages which exist are in reality between these
two extremes, and are passing from one to the other. The Greek
of Homer is at a different stage from that of the Greek tragedians ;
the Greek of the early Ionic philosophers, at a different stage from
that of Plato ; so, though in a different way (for here there was
no advancement), the Greek of Plato as compared with the Neo-
Platonist philosophy. The same remark is applicable to the Old
Testament, the earlier and later books of which may be, in a similar
way, contrasted with each other ; almost the whole of which (though
here a new language also comes in) exhibits a marked difference from
the Apocrypha. The structure of thought insensibly changes. This
is the case with all languages which have a literature they are ever
becoming more and more abstract modern languages, more than
ancient ; the later stages of either, more than the earlier. It by no
means follows that as Greek, Latin, and English have words that
correspond in a dictionary, they are real equivalents in meaning,
because words, the same, perhaps, etymologically, may be used with
different degrees of abstraction, which no accuracy or periphrasis of
translation will suffice to express, belonging, as they do generally,
to the great underlying differences of a whole language.
Another illustration of degrees of abstraction may be found in the
language of poetry, or of common life, and the language of philo
sophy. Poetry, we know, will scarcely endure abstract terms, while
they form the stock and staple of morals and metaphysics. They arc
H 2
100 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
the language of books, rather than of conversation. Theology, on
the other hand, though its problems may seem akin to those of the
moralist and metaphysician, yet tends to reject them in the same
way that English tends to reject French words, or poetry to reject
prose. He who in paraphrasing Scripture spoke of essence, matter,
vice, crime, would be thought guilty of a want of taste ; the reason
of which is, that these abstract terms are not within the circle of
our Scripture associations. They carry us into another age or
country or school of thought to the ear of the uneducated they
have an unusual sound, while to the educated they appear to involve
an anachronism or to be out of place. Vice, they say, is the moral,
sin the theological term ; nature and law are the proper words in a
treatise on physiology, while the actions of which they are the ima
ginary causes would in a prayer or sermon be suitably ascribed to
the Divine Being.
Our subject admits of another illustration from the language of the
Fathers as compared with that of Scripture. Those who have ob
served the circumstance naturally ask why it is that Scriptural ex
pressions when they reappear in the early patristic literature slightly
change their signification ? that a greater degree of personality is
given to one word, more definiteness to another, while a third has
been singled out to be the centre of a scheme of doctrine ? The
reason is, that use, and reflection, and controversy do not allow
language to remain where it was. Time itself is the great innovator
in the sense of words. No one supposes that the meaning of con
science or imagination exactly corresponds to the Latin "conscientia"
or " imaginatio." Even within the limits of our own language the
terms of the scholastic philosophy have acquired and lost a tech
nical signification. And several changes have taken place in the
language of creeds and articles, which, by their very attempt to define
and systematize, have slightly though imperceptibly departed from
the use of words in Scripture.
The principle of which all these instances are illustrations leads to
important results in the interpretation of Scripture. It tends to show,
ABSTRACT IDEAS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 101
that in using the same words with St. Paul we may not be using them
in precisely the same sense. Nay, that the very exactness with which
we apply them, the result of the definitions, oppositions, associations,
of ages of controversy, is of itself a difference of meaning. The mere
lapse of time tends to make the similarity deceitful. For if the
language of Scripture (to use an expression which will have been
made intelligible by the preceding remarks) be really at a different
stage of abstraction, great differences in the use of language will
occur, such as in each particular word escape and perplex us, and
yet, on a survey of the whole, are palpable and evident.
A well known difficulty in the interpretation of the Epistles is the
seemingly uncertain use of ciKaioavvrj, aXrjdeia, ayairr), iritrriQ, e)oa, &c.,
words apparently the most simple, and yet taking sometimes in the
same passage different shades and colours of meaning. Sometimes
they are attributes of God, in other passages qualities in man;
here realities, there mere ideas, sometimes active, sometimes
passive. Some of them, as a^apria, TT/OTIC, have a sort of personality
assigned to them, while others, as irvtvua, with which we associate
the idea of a person, seem to lose their personality. They are used
with genitive cases after them, which we are compelled to explain in
various senses. In the technical language of German philosophy,
they are objective and subjective at once. For example : in the first
chapter of the Romans, ver. 17., it is asked by commentators, "Whether
the righteousness of God, which is revealed in the Gospel," is the
original righteousness of God from the beginning, or the righteous
ness which he imparts to man, the righteousness of God in himself
or in man. So again, in ch, v. ver. 5., it is doubted whether the words
on i] aycnrr) TOV Seov eKxiyvrai iv ralg Kccjoclmte, refer to the love of
God in man, or the love of God to man. So -n-vevfj-a Seov wavers
in meaning between a separate existence, or the spirit of God, as we
should say the " mind of man," and the manifestation of that spirit
in the soul of the believer. Similar apparent ambiguities occur in
such expressions as TrivriQ Irjffov ^pioTou, viropovrj xptorov, a\i]Qeta
v, ()6a Sfov, aofyia. Seov, and several others.
H 3
102 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
A difficulty akin to tliis arises from the apparently numerous senses
in which another class of words, such as ropoe, wj), SavaroQ are used
in the Epistles of St. Paul. That VO^OQ should sometimes signify the
law of Moses, at other times the law of the conscience, and that it
should be often uncertain whether w?) referred to a life spiritual or
natural, is inconceivable, if these words had had the same precise and
defined sense that the corresponding English words have amongst
ourselves. The class of expressions before mentioned seems to
widen and extend in meaning as they are brought into contact with
God and the human soul, or transferred from things earthly and
temporal to things heavenly and spiritual. The subtle transformation
which these latter words undergo, may be best described as a meta
phorical or analogous use of them : not, to take a single instance, that
the meaning of the word " law " is so widened as to include all " law,"
but that the law of Moses becomes the figure or type of the law
written on the heart, or of the law of sin and death, and W/, the
natural life, the figure of the spiritual. Each word is a reflector of
many thoughts, and we pass from one reflection of it to another in
successive verses.
That such verbal difficulties occur much more often in Scripture
than in any other book, will be generally admitted. In Plato and
Aristotle, for example, they can be hardly said to exist at all. What
they meant by tllog or ovaia is hard to conceive, but their use of the
words does not waver in successive sentences. The language of the
Greek philosophy is, on the whole, precise and definite. A much
nearer parallel to what may be termed the infinity of Scripture is to
be found in the Jewish Alexandrian writings. There is the same
transition from the personal to the impersonal, the same figurative
use of language, the same tendency to realise and speak of all things
in reference to God and the human soul. The mind existed prior
to the ideas which are therefore conceived of as its qualities or at
tributes, and naturally coalesced with it in the Alexandrian phraseo
logy.
The difficulty of which we have been speaking, when considered in
ABSTRACT IDEAS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 103
its whole extent, is its own solution. It does but force upon us the
fact, that the use of language and the mode of thought are different in
the writings of the Apostle from what they are amongst ourselves.
It is the difficulty of a person who should set himself to explain the
structure of a language which he did not know, by one which he
did, and at last, in despair, begin to learn the new idiom. Or the
difficulty that a person would have in understanding poetry, who
imagined it to be prose. It is the difficulty that Aristotle or Cicero
found in understanding the philosophers that were before them.
They were familiar with the meaning of the words used by them, but
not with the mode of thought. Logic itself had increased the diffi
culty to them of understanding the times before logic.
This is our own difficulty in the interpretation of Scripture. Our
use of language is more definite, our abstractions more abstract, our
structure more regular and logical. But the moment we perceive and
allow for this diiference in the use of language in Scripture and among
ourselves, the difficulty vanishes. We conceive ideas in a process of
formation, failing from inspired lips, growing in the minds of men.
We throw ourselves into the world of " mixed modes," and seek to
recall the associations which the technical terms of theology no longer
suggest. We observe what may be termed the difference of level
in our own ideas and those of the first Christians, without disturb
ing the meaning of one word in relation to another.
The difficulty while it is increased, is also explained by the personi
fying character of the age. Ideas in the New Testament are relative
to the mind of God or man, in which they seem naturally to inhere
so as scarcely, in the usage of language, to have an independent exist
ence. There is ever the tendency to speak of good and virtue and
righteousness as inseparable from the Divine nature, while in evil
of every sort a reflection of conscience seems to be included. The
words 3tfcatoowi7, aXr/dem, ayavr^, are not merely equivalent to
righteousness, truth, love, but connect imperceptibly with " the
Author and Father of lights." There is no other righteousness or
truth but that of God, just as there is no sin without the consciousness
H 4
104 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
of sin in man. Consequently, the two thoughts coalesce in one, and
what are to us ideas, which we can imagine existing even without
God, are to the Israelite attributes of God himself. Still, in our
" mixed modes " we must make a further step ; for as these ideas
cannot be separated from God, so neither can they be conceived of,
except as revealed in the Gospel, and working in the heart of man.
Man who is righteous has no righteousness of his own, his righteous
ness is the righteousness of God in him. Hence, when considering
the righteousness of God, we must go on to conceive of it as the revela
tion of his righteousness, without which it would be unknown and
unmeaning to us. The abstract must become concrete, and must
involve at once the attribute of God and the quality in man. This
" concrete " notion of the word righteousness is different from the
abstract one with which we are familiar. Righteousness is the
righteousness of God ; it is also the communion of that righteousness
with man. It is used almost with the same double meaning as we
attribute to the will of God, which we speak of actively, as intending,
doing, and passively, as done, fulfilled by ourselves.
A part of this embarrassment in the interpretation of Scripture
arises out of the unconscious influence of English words and ideas
on our minds, in translating from Hellenistic Greek. The difficulty
is still more apparent, when the attempt is made to render the Scrip
tures into a language which has not been framed or moulded on
Christianity. It is a curious question, the consideration of which is
not without practical use, how far the nicer shades either of Scrip
tural expression or of later theology are capable of being made
intelligible in the languages of India or China.
Yet, on the other hand, it must be remembered, that neither
this nor any of the other peculiarities here spoken of, is a mere
form of speech, but enters deeply into the nature of the Gospel.
For the Gospel has necessarily its mixed modes, not merely be
cause it is preached to the poor, and therefore adopts the ex
pressions of ordinary life ; nor because its language is incrusted
with the phraseology of the Alexandrian writers ; but because its.
ABSTRACT IDEAS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. |05
subject is mixed, and, as it were, intermediate between God and
man. Natural theology speaks clearly, but it is of God only ; moral
philosophy speaks clearly, but it is of man only : but the Gospel is,
as it were, the communion of God and man, and its ideas are in a
state of transition or oscillation, having two aspects towards God
and towards man, which it is hard to keep in view at once. Thus,
to quote once more the example just given, the righteousness of God
is an idea not difficult to us to comprehend, human justice and good
ness are also intelligible ; but to conceive justice or righteousness as
passing from heaven to earth, from God to man, actu et potentia at
once, as a sort of life, or stream, or motion, is perplexing. And yet
this notion of the communion of the righteousness of God being
what constitutes righteousness, is of the very essence of the Gospel.
It was what the Apostle and the first believers meant and felt,
and what, if we could get the simple unlettered Christian, receiving
the Gospel as a little child, to describe to us his feelings, he would
describe.
Scripture language may thus be truly said to belong to an inter
mediate world, different at once both from the visible and invisible
world, yet partaking of the nature of both. It does not represent
the things that the eye sees merely, nor the things that are within
the veil of which those are the images, but rather the world that is
in our hearts ; the things that we feel, but nobody can express in
words. His body is the communion of His body ; His spirit is the
communion of His spirit ; the love of God is " loving as we are
loved ; " the knowledge of God is " knowing as we are known ; " the
righteousness of faith is Divine as well as human. Hence language
seems to burst its bounds in the attempt to express the different
aspects of these truths, and from its very inadequacy wavers and
becomes uncertain in its meaning. The more intensely we feel and
believe, and the less we are able to define our feelings, the more shall
we appear to use words at random ; employing sometimes one mode
of expression, sometimes another ; passing from one thought to
another, by slender threads of association ; " going off upon a word,"
106 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
as it has been called ; because in our own minds all is connected,
and, as it were, fulfilled with itself, and from the abundance of the
heart the mouth speaks. To understand the language of St. Paul
it is necessary, not only to compare the uses of words with one
another, or to be versed in Alexandrian modes of thought, but to
lead the life of St. Paul, to have the mind of St. Paul, to be one
with Christ, to be dead to sin. Otherwise the world within becomes
unmeaning to us. The inversion of all human things of which he
speaks, is attributed to the manner of his time, or the peculiarity
of his individual character ; and at the very moment when we seem
to have attained most accurately the Apostle s meaning, it vanishes
away like a shadow.
No human eye can pierce the cloud which overhangs another
life ; no faculty cf man can " by understanding find out " or express
in words the Divine nature. Yet it does not follow that our ideas
of spiritual things are wholly indefinite. There are many symbols
and images of them in the world without and below. There is a
communion of thoughts, feelings, and affections, even on earth, quite
sufficient to be an image of the communion with God and Christ, of
which the Epistles speak to us. There are emotions, and transitions,
and passings out of ourselves, and states of undefined consciousness,
which language is equally unable to express as it is to describe
justification, or the work of grace, or the relation of the believer to
his Lord. All these are rather intimated than described or defined
by words. The sigh of sorrow, the cry of joy or despair, are but
inarticulate sounds, yet expressive, beyond the power of writing, or
speech. There are many such " still small voices " of warning or
of consolation in Scripture, beyond the power of philosophy to
analyse, yet full of meaning to him who catches them aright. The
life and force of such expressions do not depend on the clearness
with which they state a logical proposition, or the vividness with
which they picture to the imagination a spiritual world. They gain
for themselves a truth in the individual soul. Even logic itself
affords negative helps to the feebleness of man in the conception of
ABSTRACT IDEAS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 107
things above him. It limits us by our own faculties ; it guards us
against identifying the images of things unseen with the " very
things themselves ; " it bars remote inferences about terms which
are really metaphorical. Lastly, it helps us to define by opposition.
Though we do not know what spirit is, we know what body is, and
we conceive of spirit as what body is not. " There is a spiritual
body, and there is a natural body." We imagine it at once both
like and unlike. We do not know what heaven, or the glory of
God, or his wisdom, is ; but we imagine them unlike this world, or
the wisdom of this world, or the glory of the princes of this world,
and yet, in a certain way, like them, imaged and symbolised by what
we see around us. We do not know what eternity is, except as the
negative of time ; but believing in its real existence, in a way
beyond our faculties to comprehend, we do not confine it within the
limits of past, present, or future. We are unable to reconcile the
power of God and the freedom of man, or the contrast of this world
and another, or even the opposite feelings of our own minds about
the truths of religion. But we can describe them as the Apostle has
done, in a paradox : 2 Cor. iv. 12., vi. 8 10.
There is yet a further way in which the ideas of Scripture may
be defined, that is, by use. It has been already observed that the
progress of language is from the concrete to the abstract. Not the
least striking instance of this is the language of theology. Embodied
in creeds, it gradually becomes developed and precise. The words
are no longer " living creatures with hands and feet," as it were,
feeling after the hearts of men ; but they have one distinct, un
changing meaning. When we speak of justification or truth, no
question arises whether by this is meant the attribute of God, or the
quality in man. Time and usage have sufficiently circumscribed the
diversities of their signification. This is not to be regarded as a
misfortune to Scriptural truth, but as natural and necessary. Part
of what is lost in power and life is regained in certainty and definite-
ness. The usage of language itself would forbid us, in a discourse
or sermon, to give as many senses to the word " law " as are attri-
108 EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
buted to it by St. Paul. Only in the interpretation of Scripture, if
we would feel as St. Paul felt, or think as he thought, it is necessary
to go back to that age before creeds, in which the water of life was
still a running stream.
The course of speculation which has been adopted in this essay,
may seem to introduce into Scripture an element of uncertainty. It
may seem to cloud truth with metaphysics, and rob the poor and
uneducated of the simplicity of the Gospel. But perhaps this is
not so. Whether it be the case that such speculations introduce
an element of uncertainty or difficulty into Scripture or not, they
introduce a new element of truth. For without the consideration
of such questions as that of which a brief sketch has been here
attempted, there is no basis for Scriptural interpretation. We are
ever liable to draw the meaning of words this way or that, ac
cording to the theological system of which we are the advocates ; to
fall under the slavery of an illogical logic, which first narrows the
mind by definitions, and then wearies it with far-fetched inferences.
Metaphysics must enter into the interpretation of Scripture, not for
the sake of intruding upon it a new set of words or ideas, but with
the view of getting rid of metaphysics and restoring to Scripture its
natural sense.
But the Gospel is still preached to the poor as before, in the same
sacred yet familiar language. They could not understand questions
of grammar before ; they do not understand modes of thought now.
It is the peculiar nature of our religious ideas that we are able to
apply them, and to receive comfort from them, without being able to
analyse or explain them. All the metaphysical and logical specula
tions in the world will not rob the poor, the sick, or the dying of the
truths of the Gospel. Yet the subject which we have been con
sidering is not without a practical result. It warns us to restore the
Gospel to its simplicity, to turn from the letter to the spirit, to with
draw from the number of the essentials of Christianity points almost
too subtle for the naked eye, which depend on modes of thought or
Alexandrian usages, to require no more of preciseness or definition
ABSTRACT IDEAS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 109
than is necessary to give form and substance to our teaching. Not
only the feebleness of human faculties, but the imperfection of lan
guage itself will often make silence our truest wisdom. The saying
of Scaliger, taken not seriously but in irony, is full of meaning :
"Many a man has missed of his salvation from ignorance of
grammar."
To the poor and uneducated, at times to all, no better advice can
be given for the understanding of Scripture than to read the Bible
humbly with prayer. The critical and metaphysical student requires
another sort of rule for which this can never be made a substitute.
His duty is to throw himself back into the times, the modes of thought,
the language of the Apostolic age. He must pass from the abstract
to the concrete, from the ideal and intellectual to the spiritual, from
later statements of faith or doctrine to the words of inspiration which
fell from the lips of the first believers. He must seek to conceive
the religion of Christ in its relation to the religions of other ages
and distant countries, to the philosophy of our own or other times ;
and if in this effort his mind seems to fail or waver, he must win
back in life and practice the hold on the truths of the Gospel which
he is beginning to lose in the mazes of speculation.
110 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
OF THE MODES OF TIME AND PLACE IN
SCRIPTURE.
& epyov rov v6p.ov ypairrbv tv rats KapSiais avruv,
povarjs avTwv TTJS <ruz/et8?7fTea>s /ecu |U6Ta|u ctAA.TfAcci ruv hoyta pui KaTTiyopovvToov ^ Kal
airoXoyov^ixav^ eV J]fJ.pq. rj Kpivel 6 &ebs TO KpvTna TWV dvQpuirwv /card rb
fj.ov 5ia Ir?<rou -xficrrov. Rom. ii. 15, 16.
THE change in the tense of Kpivti causes a difficulty in the explana
tion of this passage, which some have endeavoured to remove by a
parenthesis, extending from ov yap or $<*atftft/<romu to a-rroXoyovperwr,
and carrying back the sense of the 16th verse to the end of
the 12th or 13th (either as many as sinned in the law shall be
judged by the law in the day, &c. ; or the doers of the law shall be
justified in the day). Such a parenthesis is a fiction. Nor does the
attempt succeed better to separate avpnaprvpovtrriG from Ei%EiKvvvTa.i
and connect it with tV fipepy, as thus : " Who shew the word of the
law written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing them
witness in the day of judgment."
The only other way of taking the passage is, as the order of the
words suggests, to connect tv fiplpq. with IvSeiKrvvrai. Nothing ap
parently can get over the grammatical solecism, involved in the change
from the present to the future. For the doing and manifesting forth
the works of the law is in this present life ; but the day in which
God shall judge is future the day of judgment.
Can we say that the Apostle, in the same way that he sometimes
adopts one meaning of the law, sometimes another, so also glances from
past to present, from earth to heaven ? This assumed confusion of
times and places can only be justified, if at all, by the production of
parallel passages, and the general consideration of the modes of time
and place in Scripture,
MODES OF TIME AND PLACE IN SCEIPTURE. Ill
How there can be more than one mode of conceiving time and
place may be illustrated as follows :
A child is perfectly well aware that to-day is different from yester
day, evening from morning. It has an idea also of duration of time.
But it does not follow from this that it has an idea of past time,
such as has elapsed from the time of William the Conqueror to the
present day, or from the Flood to the Christian era. Nor again of
future time, even of the threescore years of its own future life, or of
another person s, still less of time in history, or of a continuation of
time to the end of the world. Its ideas of time are almost exclusively
present.
So with respect to place. It is not wholly ignorant of place and
distance, but it has no idea of the immensity of the world ; it is
rooted on its own little spot, and conceives of other places as much
nearer to its home than they really are. If it speaks of the world, it
has not the vaguest conception what is implied in this ; the world
is to it a sort of round infinity.
So the ancients may be said to have a very different idea of time
and space from the moderns, barbarous people from civilised, Hindoos
from Englishmen.
So we can conceive a state in which the past was unknown, " a
mystery " kept secret, thought of only in some relation to the present,
in which the future too seemed to blend with and touch the present,
and this world and the next met in the inward consciousness of the
believer. To us, it is true, there is a broad line of demarcation
between them. But we can imagine, however unlike the fact, that
we too, like children, might be living under the influence of pre
sent impressions, scarcely ever permitting ourselves to dwell on the
distant and indistinct horizon of the past or future.
Something like what has been described was really the case with
the first believers. Their modes of time differed in several respects
from our own.
First : In the very idea of the latter days. The world seemed to
be closing in upon them : 1 Cor. x. 11. They had no conception
112 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
of posterity, or of new kingdoms, or of a vista of futurity : 6
trvytffraXfilvof Now was the day of salvation ; now was their sal
vation nearer than when they believed. Rom. xiii. 11.
Secondly : In the conception of the duration of time. Living, as
they did, in the daily expectation of the coming of Christ, seeing the
face of the world change in the few years of their own life, time to
them was crowded with events. A moment was sufficient for the
greatest act of life ; another moment would be sufficient for the act
of judgment. There is no idea of gradually growing up from
heathenism to the Gospel, but always of sudden conversion, in an
instant, in the twinkling of an eye. This is why even the shortest
periods of time seem so filled with changes and experiences ; why a
few short months are sufficient for the conversion and the lapse of
whole Churches. Time was to them at once short and long ; short,
absolutely ; long, in reference to the events that hurried by.
Thirdly : In relation to this life and a future, which to ourselves
are set one against the other, divided by the gate of death. To them
another life was one with, and the continuation of this. Both were
alike embraced in the expression " eternal life." They were " wait
ing for the revelation of the Lord " (1 Cor. i. 7.) ; and yet the things
" that eye had not seen, nor ear heard," had already been revealed
to them through the Spirit (1 Cor. ii. 4.). So in reference to a
future judgment. It was at once present and future. So far as it
resembled the judgments of Sinai, it was future ; so far as it was
inward and spiritual, it was present. Compare John, v. 24, 25. :
" He that believeth on me hath everlasting life, and cometh not into
condemnation, but is passed from death unto life. Yerily, verily, I
say unto you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall
hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear shall live."
Fourthly : In reference to past time, a difference is observable in
its being less vivid and distinct than to ourselves. This seems to
be the reason why in many passages of Scripture the divinity of
Christ dates from his manifestation on earth. The first believers
did not uniformly think of Christ as existing from all eternity.
MODES OF TIME AND PLACE IN SCRIPTURE. 113
They conceived Him as they had seen Him on earth at last entering
into His glory, " ordained to be the Son of God with power." It
was not settled by the language of any creed that He was the only-
begotten of the Father, begotten before the worlds. The question
had not been asked, the doubt had not arisen. So little did the idea
of time enter into their conception of His existence, that they could
speak of Him at once as " ordained to be the Son of God with power,"
and also as " the firstborn of every creature," as " speaking by the
prophets," and yet also as contrasted with them and following them.
Heb. i. 2.
The general result of our inquiry thus far is, that the modes of
time in the New Testament converge towards the present moment.
Not, of course, that there is no past or no future ; but that they meet
in the TtXrj rwv cuo/rajy, which are at once the revelation of both.
Hence, however great the grammatical irregularity, the passage
from the present to the future, which, like the unseen, was present
and realised by faith. The transition was natural from the judgment
of conscience here to the day of the Lord hereafter.
Compare the following :
$r)cra.vpieig (reavry opyrjv iv fi/Jitpq. opyijg KCU aTTOKaXv^ewg fiiKaio-
Kpiffiag TOV S foy. Rom. ii. 5.
6 evXoyriffag jj^ag iv iraffy evXoyiq. TTVEV^CLTIK^ kv role eTrovpaviotg
iv xpicrTw. Eph. i. 3.
In the first of these passages, there is nearly the same confusion of
times as in Rom. ii. 16. : " You are treasuring up for yourself
something future in the day of judgment."
In the second, the confusion seems to be precisely parallel, if it be
not rather one of place than of time : " Who hath blessed us here
present upon earth with all future and heavenly blessings."
So 1 Thess. ii. 19. : TLQ yap r]fj.HJv eXirlg r} X a l^ ^ aTtfyavog KO.V%{]-
?} OV^L KOL vfj,~ig, tfjiTrpoffdev TOV Kvpiov r]fj.it>v Iqarov iv rrj avrov
; 1 Cor. i. 8. : oe KCU /3/3cuwo-t vpag tug reXovc aveyKXrjrovg
kv rrj r//^(occ TOV xvpiov i]^,(SJv Irjffov Xpurrov ; 2 Cor. i. 14. : /ca0wf fcal
f.Triyvu)T f]{Jiag airo pepovg, on Kav^j.ia V^LMV ka^lv Kadcurep cai vfjielg
VOL. II. I
114 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
kv rr\ /)/jf|Oct rov Kvplov [fyuwy] Irjaov ; Col. iii. 6., for a weaker
expression of the same.
These latter passages are sufficiently parallel with the one which
we are considering, to justify the grammatical irregularity of con
necting erdeiKwvTai with kv rjpepa TOV Kvpiov. We say, the sen
tence of conscience anticipates a higher tribunal. To the Apostle
the testimony of conscience enters within the vail, and is already in
the presence of God. His thoughts are so transferred to the day of
judgment, that in that, and through that only, he measures all things.
Parallel to the modes of time, though less important, are what may
be termed the modes of place in the New Testament.
First : In reference to the word aiwv, which is at once a period of
time, and also the world which is to subsist in that period, aluv
OVTOQ and aiwv o peXXwv originally mean the times before and after
Messiah s coming ; but are also opposed, not merely as we should
oppose this life and a future, but as this world and another.
Secondly : In the indistinctness of the idea of heaven, which is at
once a different place from the earth, and co-existing with it in the
same sense that the stars and the sky co-exist with it ; and also the
kingdom of God within the spiritual dwelling-place in which ideas
of time and place are no more. Thus it is said, "I beheld Satan
as lightning fall from heaven," Luke, x. 18. : and again, " The
heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon
the Son of man," John, i. 51., in which a sort of pictorial image is
presented to the mind. So 2 Cor. xii. 2. : "I knew a man in Christ
above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body or out of the body I
cannot tell,) such an one caught up into the third heaven." But, on
the other hand: "We have our conversation in heaven," or, "who
hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly (places),"
kv TOIQ iTTovpavloLG, Eph. i. 3., where heaven cannot be thought of as a
distinct place from earth.
Thirdly : There is a certain degree of indistinctness in the ideas of
place as applied only to the earth. As the ends of the world seem
to meet in the present moment in the consciousness of the believer,
MODES OF TIME AND PLACE IN SCRIPTURE. 115
so also the idea of the earth itself is narrowed to that spot in which
the struggle is going on, which is all the world to him. A vivid
consciousness of past time was, we saw, different from that general
and undefined conception of the " ages of ages " which we find in
Scripture. So also a geographical idea of all the countries of the
earth, with their peoples, climates, languages, is quite different from that,
shall we say, spiritual notion of place which occurs in the Epistles.
Here, where the Apostle himself is, is the scene of the great struggle ;
the places which he has visited, are the whole world, in which the
powers of good and evil are arrayed against one another ; a small spot
of ground, like a small period of time, is fraught with the fortunes of
mankind ; the more earthly measure of place and distance is lost.
This spiritual notion of time and place is not possible to ourselves,
but only to an age which has an imperfect conception of past history,
and an indistinct knowledge of the countries of the world. To the
Apostle it was natural. In this way, allowing also something for
Oriental modes of speech, we are to account for such expressions as
the following : "I thank my God that your faith is made known in
the whole world," Romans, i. 8. ; or, the salutation of 1 Cor. i. 2.,
" Unto the Church of God which is at Corinth, sanctified in Christ
Jesus, chosen saints, with all that call upon the name of our Lord
Jesus Christ, in every place both their s and our s ; " where " in every
place " is probably to be interpreted by the first chapter of the second
epistle, kv 0X77 ry A^a/g. Compare also, 1 Thess. i. 8. : "For from you
hath sounded forth the word of the Lord, not only in Macedonia and
Achaia, but in every place your faith to Godward is spread abroad,
so that we have no need to say any thing." And yet the Apostle, at
the time of writing this, could hardly have been anywhere but in
Macedonia and Achaia.
These mixed modes of time and place are no longer mixed to us,
but clear and distinct. We live in the light of history and of nature,
and can never mingle together what is inward and what is without
us. We cannot but imagine everywhere, and at all times, heaven to
be different from earth, the past from the future and present. No
I 2
116 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
inward conscience can ever efface the limits that separate them. No
" contemplation of things under the form of eternity " will take us
from the realities of life. We sometimes repeat the familiar language
of Scripture, but always in a metaphorical sense. If we desire to
understand, and not merely to explain it away, we must throw our
selves back to the age of the Apostle, and gather his meaning from
his own words."
117
CHAP. III.
THE force of the Apostle s argument in the first verses of the
following chapter, may be illustrated by a parallel which comes home
to ourselves. We may suppose a person enlarging, in a sermon or
in conversation, on the comparative state of the heathen and
Christian world, dwelling first of all on the enormities and unnatural
vices of India or China, and then on the formalism and hypocrisy
and conventionality of Christians throughout the world, until at last
he concludes by saying that many heathen are better than most
Christians, and that at the last day the heathen may judge us ; and
that as God is no respecter of persons, it matters little whether we
are called Christians or not, if we follow Christ. Christian or
heathen, " he can t be wrong," it might be said, " whose life is in the
right." Then would arise the question, What profit was there in
being a Christian if, as with the Jews of old, many should come
from the East and the West, and sit down with Christ and his
Apostles in the kingdom of heaven, while those bearing the name of
Christians were cast out ? To which there would be many answers ;
first, that of St. Paul respecting the Jews, " because that unto us
are committed the oracles of God ; " and above all, that we have a
new truth and a new power imparted to us. Still difficulties would
occur as we passed beyond the limits of the Christian world.
Passages of Scripture would be quoted, which seemed to place the
heathen also within the circle of God s mercies ; and again, other
passages which seemed to exclude them. It might be doubted
whether in any proper sense there was a Christian world ; so little
did there seem to be anything resembling the first company of
believers ; so faint was the bond of communion which the name of
Christian made amongst men ; so slender the line of demarcation
i 3
118 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
which mere Christianity afforded, compared with civilisation and
other influences. Suppose, now, a person, struggling with these and
similar difficulties, to carry the question a stage further back, and
to urge that Christianity, failing of its end, this is of itself an im
peachment of the truth and goodness of God. For if there were any
who did not accept the Gospel, then it could not be said that an
Omnipotent Being who had the power, and an Omniscient Being who
knew the way, had also the will that all mankind should be saved.
Why should the Unchangeable punish men for sins that could not
affect Himself? Why should He execute a vengeance which He was
incapable of feeling ? And so he would lead us on to the origin of
evil and the eternal decrees, and the everlasting penalty. Speaking
as a philosopher, he might say, that we must change our notion of a
Divine Being, in the face of such facts. Those who were arguing
with him, might be unable or unwilling to discuss speculative diffi
culties, and might prefer to rest their belief on two simple founda
tions: first, the truth and justice and holiness of God; and, secondly,
the moral consequences of the doctrine of their opponents. It makes
no difference whether we suppose the argument carried on between
disputants, or whether we suppose a religious sceptic arguing with
himself on the opposite aspects of those great questions, which in
every age, from that of Job and Ecclesiastes, have been more or less
clearly seen in various forms, Jewish as well as Christian, as pro
blems of natural or of revealed religion, common alike to the Greeks
and to ourselves, and which have revived again and again in the course
of human thought.
The train of reflection which has been thus briefly sketched, is not
unlike that with which St. Paul opens the third chapter. The Jew
and the Gentile have been reduced to a level by the requirements of
the moral law. The circumcision of the heart and the imcircum-
cision of the letter take the place of the circumcision of the letter
and uncircumcision of the heart. Such a revolution naturally leads
the Jew to ask what his own position is in the dispensations of Pro
vidence. What profit is there in being sons of Abraham, if of these
SUBJECT OF THE EPISTLE. 119
stones God was raising up children unto Abraham ? To which the
Apostle replies, first, that they had the Scriptures. But it might be
said, "they believed not." Such an objection is suggested by the
Apostle himself, who draws it out of the secret soul of the Jew, that
he may answer it more fully. " Shall their unbelief make the pro
mise of God of none effect." Such promises are " yea and amen ; "
but they are also conditional. God forbid that they should be called
in question, because man breaks their conditions. Imagine all men
faithless, yet does God remain true.
Still the objector or the objection returns, in the fifth verse, from
another point of view, which is suggested by the quotation which
immediately precedes, " that thou mayest be justified in thy sayings,
and mayest overcome when thou art judged." In any case then God
is justified ; why doth He yet punish ? If we do no harm to Him,
why does He do harm to us ? We are speaking as one man does of
another ; but is not God unjust ? To which the Apostle replies
(according to different explanations of rov /coWov), either, " shall not
the Judge of all the earth do rightly ? " or, how can you, who are a
Jew, suppose that the God whose attribute it is "to judge among
the heathen " is one who may be called unjust ? In this question is
contained the answer to those who say, " My unrighteousness com
mends the righteousness of God, and therefore God has no right to
take vengeance on me." Still the objection is repeated in a slightly
altered form, not now, " If my unrighteousness commends the righ
teousness of God ; " but, " If my falsehood abounds to the glory of
His truth, why am I still judged as a sinner ? " To which St. Paul
replies, not by dwelling further on the truth or justice of God, but
by ironically stating the consequence of the doctrine, " Let us do evil
that good may come, let us sin to the glory of God, let us lie to
prove his truth ;" and, then dropping the strain of irony, he adds
seriously in his natural style, "whose damnation is just."
The chief difference between this argument and the one which, for
the sake of illustration, is prefixed to it, is that the great questions
which are suggested in the first, are here narrowed to the Jewish
i 4
120 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
point of view. The objector does not find any general difficulty in
justifying the ways of God to man, but in harmonising the rejection
of the Jews with the privileges of the chosen race. What seemed to
him injustice, was justice to all mankind. He is animated by a sort
of moral indignation at being reduced to the same level as the rest of
the world.
The substance of the Apostle s argument is the same as that of
chap. ix. 19, 20., in which he again assumes the person of an objector :
" Thou wilt then say unto me, Why does He yet find fault, for who
hath resisted His will ? Nay, but O man, who art thou that repliest
against God ? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it,
why hast thou made me thus ? " It is an anticipation of the subject
of chapters ix., x., xi., the passing thought of which is intimated in
the word ox^eXfT, in ver. 25. of the preceding chapter (compare
ver. 1. rig i] ttye Xem), which stands in the same relation to chap. iii.
ver. 1 8., as the conclusion of the second chapter to what follows
in the third.
122
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Off. III.
rt ovv rb 7Tpi(Torov TOV lovSaiov, r) rig 17 fex^eXeia TT)? %
; 7TO\V KCLTCL TTOLVTCL TpOTTOV. TTpGJTOV * p,V OTL 2
ra Xoyia TOV 0ov. ri yap el rjiricrTTjcrdv 3
; JUT) TI aTTLCTTia CLVTOJV Trjv TTLcrTLV TOV Oeov KaTapyTJo~i;
yeVoiro ywecrOa) Se 6 6eos aX^^g, Tras Se avdpanros 4
yeypaTTTcu, Ows av Si/ccucoftjs eV rot?
Xdyoig crou Acal viKijcrys iv ra> KpLv.<r9aL ere. et Se 17 dStACta 5
2. /caret Trai^ra rpo?ro^, z w every
way.~\ The Apostle mentions one
way, and is entangled in a new
series of thoughts.
Trpwrov pel , first.~\ There is no
"secondly;" not that St. Paul
breaks off, as Olshausen suggests,
because he felt that, in the single
point of the knowledge of the
Scriptures, he had included all.
The irregularity is a matter of
style. Compare i. 8., irp&rov pev
eTriffTevdrjarav, SC. oi lov-
t, as in 1 Cor. ix. 17., OLKOVO-
ra Xo ym TOV S eoi;, the oracles
of God,~\ applied in Numbers,
xxiv. 15. ( CLKOVWV \oyia 0eoi)) to
the prophecy of Balaam ; in Acts,
xviii. 38. to the ten command
ments and to the law; here, rather
to the Scriptures generally.
In what follows, " Is the Apo
stle speaking of himself, or in the
person of some other man ? "
Both, or neither ; in one sense
he is, in another he is not. That
is to say ; partly from defect in
power of expression, partly also
from the imaginative cast of his
mind, which leads him to place
vividly before himself the oppo
site view to his own, he seems
to desert his original standing
ground, and to alternate between
the two sides of his own mind.
Especially is this the case where
the very elements of his former
and present life are in conflict.
He almost goes over into the
enemy s camp, and then revolts
from it. Though not really
objecting, he assumes the person
of an objector, and repeats what
he would have said himself and
what he had heard others say.
Comp. vii. 725., ix. 1422.;
1 Cor. x. 2832.
3. ri yap el r]TriffTr](Tnr TLVCQ ;
for what if some did not believe ?~\
Not the objection, but the answer
to the objection. You will per
haps say, " they did not believe;"
that makes no difference. But
the objection is not yet crushed ;
it reappears in the next clause,
suggested by the word //TriVr^o-av
itself. The very question I mean
to ask is, whether " their unbelief
will make the grace of God of
none effect."
//j) is used in the New Testa
ment indifferently, either in ques
tions intended to have an affirm
ative answer, or implying an
inclination to the opposite (Luke,
vi. 39.), or in mere doubts
(John, viii. 22.). That in this
passage the answer would have
been an affirmative, follows from
p) yivoLTo in the next verse, which
deprecates the intended assent.
Though the two questions follow
one another, the tone of them is
VEK. 24.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
123
3 What advantage then hath the Jew ? or what profit
2 is there of circumcision ? Much every way : chiefly,
because* they were entrusted with the oracles of
s God. For what if some did not believe ? whether * 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.
different. The first, ri yap el Tinier.,
is intended to have a negative
answer. " It makes no difference ;
if some did not believe what of
that ? " But the second conveys
an objection to the first, to which
the Apostle for a moment gives
way, which is followed up and
finally answered by ju>) yivoiro in
the following verse.
r/ cnriffria, unbelief.^ The un
belief here referred to might con
sist, either in the rebellion of
the Jews in the wilderness, or
in their rejection of Christ ; or
better, the former may be a figure
of the latter, as in Rom. ix. ; and
1 Cor. x. 710.
TTfV TTlffTLV TOV $OV, the faith
of God,~\ like ^iKcuovvvr) $eoi>
above. The play of words is
hardly translateable in English.
" Shall their want of faith make
of none effect the good faith of
God." From the sense of " the
faith " which men have in God,
Trt rmc passes into the meaning of
the faith which God exercises
towards men. (Comp. aya-trr}
-&foi>, ver. 5.)
Thus we leave the first stage
of the objection. May not the
unbelief of man mar the faithful
ness of God ? The second being
But if their unbelief es
tablished the righteousness of
God, ver. 5. The third But
if their untruth reflected the
glory of God.
4. p) yevoLTO. God forbid.~\
That be far from us. Be it ours
rather to affirm that God is true,
though every man be a liar.
The paronomasia on yivoiro and
yivevdcj was probably intentional.
Comp. above, 2, 3. emffTevdijvav
and iiTriffTrffav ; also UTrtorta and
To argue against this mode of
explaining the passage that the
Apostle could not have meant
seriously to wish that every man
should be a liar, is the error of
" rhetoric turned logic." See in
chap. ix. 3. It is needless, with
the view of avoiding this objec
tion, to translate ytvladio, "let it
be according to the saying," let
the words of Scripture be ful
filled, " God is true, though
all men are liars," a sense
which is not sufficiently sup
ported by 1 Cor. xv. 34., where
the position of the word is dif
ferent.
kv TU> KptveffQat ere, when thouart
judged.^ Kpiveadai is used in a
passive as well as active or
middle sense, both in the Old
Testament and in the New. For
the first compare Lam. iii. 36.,
1 Cor. vi. 2. ; for the second
Judges, xxi. 22., 1 Cor. vi. 1. ; in
the latter use with the meaning
124
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[OH. III.
6eov SiKaLoo"uyy}v arvvicrTTjcn, rl e{
6 #eos 6 iTTitfrepcov TT)Z> opyrjv ; Kara avOpomov Xeyo>.
yeVoiro * evret TTWS Kpwel 6 $eos rov KOCTUOV ; ei yap *
x rov Oeov iv T< e/xw i//evo~/>LaTt eTreptcrcrevcref et<
^ Sd^ai avrou, rt ert Acdya> a>s d/xaprajXos Kpivopai ; /cat s
Xeyeiz^ on TroiTjo w/xet rd /ca/cd IVa eX^ rd ay add ; )v TO
KpljJia i
not precisely of judging but
rather of going to law, or enter
ing into judgment.
If we translate "that thou
mightest overcome when thou
art judged," the sentence gains
a new point. The word KpivevOat
refers to the previous objection :
" that thou mightest overcome
when (as had just been done)
thou art judged." The parallel
ism of the clauses, on the other
hand, is better preserved by the
active " when thou enterest
into judgment."
It is a favourite figure of the
Old Testament Scriptures to re
present impiety rising up against
God and challenging His ways.
The wicked are allowed to assert
themselves against Him that they
may be crushed by His might.
There is a terrible irony in the
way in which Almighty power
is described, as playing with them
for a while, and then launching
upon them its vengeance.
5. Notwithstanding the recoil
of the Apostle, the objector re
turns to the charge, finding ma
terials for a new objection in the
answer to the previous one. But
if, as you say, nothing can impair
the truth or holiness of God, if
our unrighteousness does but es
tablish it, if in any case God is
justified, is He not unjust for
bringing wrath upon us ? if He
cannot be harmed of any, why
should He harm us ?
p) a^t/coe.] See note on ver. 3.
Here /i>) implies in the answer the
belief that this is so, and the pre
tended wish that it were not so.
Kara avdpwTrov Xeyw.] I use a
human figure of speech. I do
but speak as I can imagine men
speaking. The Apostle apologises
for the mere hypothesis which he
has put into the mouth of an
other, of injustice in God.
6. fJ-i) ylvoiTo,forbidit. ] "For
how shall God, if he be unjust,
judge the heathen ? " (rov Koapov).
The Jews drew a distinction be
tween the judgment of themselves
and the heathen, which has been
sometimes thought to have a
place in this passage. It was
founded upon such passages as
" He shall judge among the hea
then ; " whence it was inferred,
that the heathen were to be
judged, but not the chosen people :
just as it is sometimes said among
Christians, the wicked are to be
judged, the elect not. It agrees
better, however, with the spirit
of St. Paul to take rov Koapov for
the whole world, without dis
tinction of Jew or Gentile ; as in
Rom. iii. 19. the whole world is
spoken of as becoming subject to
the just judgment of God. The
VEE. 58.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
125
But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness
of God, what shall we say ? Is not * God unrighteous
6 who taketh vengeance ? (I speak as a man) God forbid,
7 for then how shall God judge the world ? For if the
truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto
s his glory; why notwithstanding* am I still judged as a
sinner ? 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.
general meaning will be the same
as that expressed in Gen. xviii.
25.: "Shall not the judge of
all the earth do right?"
7. Still unsatisfied, the ob
jector, or St. Paul in the person
of the objector, repeats the ob
jection of ver. 5. in a slightly
altered form ; not " if my un
righteousness establishes the
righteousness of God," but "if my
untruth abounds to the glory of
His truth, why am I still judged
as a sinner ; " KOI, not " why am I
as well as the Gentile?" or, "why
am I, even though I be a sinner ? "
but simply, " why am I still ? "
In such expressions icai is a soft
ened way of saying, " in spite of
that fact ; " why am I, over and
above contributing to the glory
of God, which should be set down
to my credit, to be punished too ?
Comp. the use of K<U in 1 Cor. xv.
29., ei O\(I)Q reKpol OVK eyeipovrai,
TI Kal /3a7rr/ovrcu virep avrwv ;
8. And why not draw the
wicked and absurd conclusion,
"Let us do evil that good may
come, pecca, fortiter pecca, to
the glory of God?"
KaQwQ /3Xa<70i7juovju9a. We can
only conjecture who they were,
who charged the Apostle with
doing evil that good may come.
From the Epistle of St. James
it may be inferred, that there
were among the Jews those
whom we should term anti-
nomians ; who preached faith
without works ; who, as Philo
informs us, held it sufficient to
keep the spirit of the law with
out conforming to its ceremonies
or other requirements, (De Migr.
Abrah. Mangey, i. 450.) In the
teaching of St. Paul, there was
sufficient to form the groundwork
of such an accusation. That he
was sensitive to the charge, and
apprehensive of the abuse of his
doctrine, is evident from chap,
vi. I.
The construction seems to
arise out of a confusion of ri p}
TroriiffwjjLEv, why should we not do?
and 7rot/7<rwju^, let us do, the word
6Vt, which has slipped in from the
attraction of Xe yetv, being the
cause of a wavering between the
oratio recta and obliqua.
9 27. At this point the Apo
stle leaves the digression into
which he had been drawn, and
returns to the main subject ; de
scribing, in the language of the
Old Testament, the evil of those
who are under the law, that is,
of the whole former world ; and
revealing the new worl^ in which
126
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[OH. III.
Tu ovv ; Trpoe^ofJieda ; ov 7rdvT(t)<$ * TrpoyTiacrdfJieOa yap 9
re /cat "EXXrjvas TrdVras vfi a^apriav etz ai,
/ v j-v c / jo>\^ > v in
yeypcLTTTOLL <m ov/c OT> OIKCUOS ouoe eis, ou/c COTH/ J"
1 , ov/c ecrnz [6] eK&jT&v TOV deov TrdVres et;eK\ivav, 12
a/xa tfxpeiuOrjcrav OVK term; TTOLWV ^p^crror^ra, OUK ecmv
eiw? ez os. rectos dVeary/^eVos 6 \dpvyt; OLVTMV, rais yXcoor- 13
crat? avTwv iSoXiovcrav, 105 dcrTTiSo)^ VTTO ra X 6 ^ 7 ? CLVTM^ .
wt TO crrd/xa [avra>^] dpa? /cai iriKpias yepa. ofet? ot {J
TroSes avTO)V IfC^fOU at/xa, crtW /oijUjna Acal Ta\ai7ra>pia iv is
OVK eywcrav. OVK. J
rats oSotg avTaiv, KOL 6$ov
ffvviow.
God manifests forth his righ
teousness in Christ Jesus. In
the previous chapter, he had not
distinctly denied the privileges
of the Jew ; or had, at least,
veiled the purely moral principle
for which he was contending,
under the figure of " the Jew
inwardly," and " circumcision of
the heart." At the commence
ment of the third chapter, he
brought forward the other side
of the argument, from which he
is driven by the extravagance of
the Jew. At length, dropping
his imperfect enumeration of the
advantages of the Jew, he boldly
affirms the result, that the Jew is
no better than the Gentile, and
that all need the salvation, which
all may have.
9. Tt ovv ; 7r,ooxo^0a ;] Like T L
ovv; apapTtiffUfjiEV", vi. 15. "What
then ? are we better than they ?
No, by no means." This way of
taking the passage gives the best
sense, and does the least violence
to the language. The objection
to it is that the middle, which
would ordinarily have the signi
fication of "to hold before,"
"put forward as a pretext," is
here used like the active in the
sense of " surpass," "excel." The
mode of taking the passage which
connects ri ovv with
either in the sense of what pre
text do we allege? or what ad
vantage have we ? furnishes no
proper sense for ov Travrwe, and is
open to the further objection that
no other instance occurs of ri
ovv being used where ri is the
remote object of a verb, in the
writings of St. Paul. The em
phatic use of Trpoe^o^eda in the
sense of " have we a pretext ? "
is still more contrary to analogy
than the confusion of the middle
and active voice.
The Apostle had previously
spoken of the Jews in the third
person. Now he is about to utter
an unpalatable truth. Is it an
over refinement to suppose that
he changes the person to soften
the expression by identifying
himself with them ? Compare
1 Cor. iv. 6. "These things I
have transferred in a figure to
myself and Apollos, for your
sakes."
ov TTCIITWC, no surely."^ Comp.
the use of TTO.VTMQ in 1 Cor. v. 10.,
ix. 10. The Apostle is not think
ing of TroAv Kara iravra rporrov,
VEK. 9 18. J
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
127
9 What then ? are we better than they ? No, in no
wise : for we have before proved both Jews and Gen-
10 tiles, that they are all under sin; as it is written, There
11 is none righteous, no, not one : 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,
is no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre ; with
their tongues they have used deceit ; the poison of asps
H is under their lips : whose mouth is full of cursing and
\l bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood, afflic-
17 tion* and misery are in their ways, and the way of
is peace have they not known. There is no fear of God
which has preceded in ver. 1.,
but of the general condemnation
which is to follow.
Trarrac,] not a mere hyperbole,
or put, as Grotius supposes, for
"most," but as in ver. 12. 19.
10. /oaSwc ytypciTrrcu, as it is
written.] In what follows the
Apostle quotes different passages
of Scripture ; descriptive either
of the enemies of the psalmist,
or containing denunciations of
the prophets against the iniqui
ties of Israel at particular times
to illustrate the sinfulness of men
in general.
The words ori OVK ttrriv $titatoc
ovBe tie may be either an intro
duction of the Apostle s own, in
which he gives the substance of
the following quotations, or an
imperfect recollection of the first
verse of Psalm liii., OVK tern
ctya0oV, or of Ps. xiv., OVK:
lf el tffTi G\)vid)v 1} Ic^
The eleventh verse is slightly
altered in sense from the second
verse of Psalm xiv. in the LXX. :
- KVplOQ K TOV OVpaVOV $ttn//CV
CTTt TOVg ViOVQ T&V a.v8p<Jt)K(t)V TOV
12 17. have been inserted
from this passage in the Alexan
drian MS. of the LXX. at Ps.
xiv. 3.
13. quoted from the LXX. Ps.
v. 9. down to (.^oXiovaav. The
meaning is, that men fall into their
snares as into open graves among
the rocks. Comp. Ps. vii. 15.
toe CIVTWV. Ps. cxl. 3.
14. slightly altered from the
LXX. Ps. x. 7.
15 17. quoted, not after the
LXX., from Isaiah, lix. 7., where
the prophet is describing the de
praved state of Israel.
18. From the LXX. of Psalm
xxxvi. 1. What does the Apo
stle intend to prove by these
quotations ? That at various
times mankind have gone astray,
and done evil ; that in particular
cases the prophets and psalm
ists energetically denounced the
wickedness of the Jews, or of
their enemies. This is all that
can be strictly gathered from
them, and yet not enough to sup-
128
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. III.
ecrnv <d/3o9 Oeov OLTTZVCLVTI ra>v o^OaXptov avT&v* olSaptv
Se on ocra 6 ^0/^09 Xeyei rots o> TOJ vo^o* XaXel, IVa
crTOju-a (frpayf) Kal viroSiKos yevrjraL TTOL? 6 /cocr/xos r<
Store e .pya>v vopov ov Si/catco^crerat Tracra era/of IVMTTIOV 20
port what is termed the Apo
stle s argument. From the fact
that the enemies of David were
perfidious and deceitful, that the
children of Israel, in the time of
the prophet Isaiah, were swift to
shed blood, we can draw no con
clusions respecting mankind in
general. Because Englishmen
were cruel in the times of the
civil wars, or because Charles
the First had bitter and crafty
enemies, we could not argue that
the present generation, not to
say the whole world, fell under
the charge of the same sin. Not
wholly unlike this, however, is
the adaptation which the Apo
stle makes of the texts which he
has quoted from the Old Testa
ment. He brings them together
from various places to express
the thought which is passing
through his mind ; and he quotes
them with a kind of authority, as
we might use better language
than our own to enforce our
meaning. In modern phraseo
logy, they are not arguments, but
illustrations. The use of them
is exactly similar to our own
use of Scripture in sermons,
where the universal is often in
ferred from the particular, and
precepts or events divested of
the particular circumstances
which accompany them, or the
occasions on which they arose,
are made to teach a general les
son. It was after the manner
of the Apostle s age, and hard
ly less after the manner of our
own.
19. otctajuci/ Se on, butweknow.~]
Is St. Paul referring here to the
Jews or to mankind in general ?
If the former, there arises a diffi
culty respecting the meaning of
the words, " every mouth," " all
the world," which seem coex
tensive with " those under the
law."
(1.) We may suppose that the
Apostle, having already con eluded
the Gentiles under sin in the first
chapter, is using these texts
against the Jews, to complete the
proof against men in general.
" We know that whomsoever
these words out of the law touch,
they must touch the Jew, who is
under the law, so that he forms
no exception, and the whole world
including the Jew, come under
the judgment of God." Or, (2.)
The Jew is regarded by him as
the type of the Gentile ; and
having convicted the one, he as
sumes, a fortiori, the conviction of
the other.
It cannot be denied, that either
of the two explanations is far
fetched, and also ill-suited to the
connexion. For in the 9th verse
which introduced these passages,
nothing was said of their special
application to the Jews. " For
we before proved all both Jews
and Gentiles to be under sin, as
it is written." But (3.) if the
words TOLQ kv ru> vojjiu) cannot be
confined to the Jew, their mean
ing must extend to mankind in
general. The law of Moses, it
may be said, is with the Apostle
the image of law in general, and
VER. 19, 20.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
129
19 before their eyes. Now 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
20 world come into judgment before God. Because* by
the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in
mankind have been already spo
ken of as having a law written on
the heart. According to this
view, the meaning of the pas
sage might be : " We know
that whatsoever things the law
or the prophets say, they say to
those who in any sense are under
the law."
Considering the numerous tran
sitions of meaning which occur
in the use of the word ro^os
(comp, Rom. vii. 21., viii. 1 4. ;
and the use of irvev^a, in 1 Cor.
ii. 10.), it cannot be held a fatal
objection to this interpretation
that it explains the word VO/JIOQ
in different senses in successive
lines. There is nothing incon
sistent in this with the style of
St. Paul. But still those " who
are under the law " would be an
abrupt and obscure expression,
for "those who have the law
written on their hearts." And in
this instance there is an absolute
unmeaningness and want of point
in saying " we know that what
soever things the written law
saith, it saith to them who have
not the written law."
Another (4.) and more pro
bable point of view, in which the
explanation that applies ro~ig kv
TV ropy to all mankind, may be
regarded, is the following : The
Apostle has found words in the
law which describe the sinfulness
of man, who, from this very cir
cumstance, may be said to be
VOL. II.
under or in the law. He does
not mean to say that the law
speaks to those who are under
the law, but that those to whom
the law speaks are under the
law. All those who are thus
described, are drawn within the
law, and belong to the prior dis
pensation. Or, more simply :
The law in saying these things
speaks to persons over whom it
has authority (comp. vii. 1., 6
ro/j.OQ Kvpievei rov ctvflpwTrov) ; it is
not a mere abstraction.
This interpretation, though dif
ficult, is in accordance with the
style and spirit of the Apostle.
As, in the first chapter, he spoke
of the Gentiles as knowing God,
and condemned by their know
ledge, so in this passage, he re
gards all mankind as under the
sentence of the law of Moses. It
is further rendered necessary and
confirmed by the following verse,
as well as by what has preceded.
For not only in the verse which
precedes the citation from the
Old Testament, has the Apostle
made no distinction between Jew
and Gentile, but in ver. 20. he
expressly speaks of Gentile as
well as Jew, as incapable of jus
tification by the deeds of the
law.
20. e)(dri f t pywv VOJJLOV, be
cause by the deeds of the law.~\
Is this to be understood of the
ceremonial or of the moral law ?
It would be arbitrary to narrow
;o
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
. III.
avrov Sia yap vofjiov liriyvcocrLS a/zaprias. vvvl Se ^CO/DIS
Otov TreffravepaiTaL, jnapTvpovjnez>7? VTTO
the meaning of these words to
the ceremonial law, even if we
were not prevented from doing
so by the universality of the ex
pression Travel ffapZ, which in
cludes the Gentiles, who had
nothing to do with the cere
monial law.
The object of Arminian and
Romanist divines has ever been
to confine the "works of the
law" to the ceremonial law,
thereby gaining a supposed im
munity for the doctrine of justi
fication by works in another
sense. Calvinists and Lutherans,
with a truer perception of the
Apostle s purpose, have affirmed
that the moral law could, as
little as the ceremonial, be made
the groundwork of acceptance
with God. They have truly
urged, that there is no indication
in the writings of St. Paul of the
existence of such a distinction.
The law is to him one law, the
whole law, the figure, indeed, of
many things, but never sepa
rated into the portion that re
lates to ceremonies, and the
portion that relates to moral pre
cepts.
It may be further maintained,
not only that there is no such
distinction in the mind of the
Apostle, but that, consistently
with the modes of thought of his
age, there could not have been
such. It is what has been termed
before an afterthought of theo
logy, which would naturally
arise when the ceremonial law
had died away a sort of sepa
ration of body and soul when life
is extinct. Not that to St. Paul,
or the Jews who were his con
temporaries, all the precepts of
the law seemed of equal im
portance. The prophets had
constantly opposed the blood of
bulls and goats "to the doing
justice, and loving mercy, and
walking humbly with God." But
it does not follow from this, that
the moral and ceremonial law
were separated from each other
in such a sense, that the Scribes
and Pharisees placed some pre
cepts under the one head and
others under the other. Rather,
they were blended together in
one, like Ethics and Politics in
the early Greek philosophy.
When a Jew spoke of the law,
it never occurred to him to ask
whether he meant the moral or
ceremonial law ; or when he
spoke of sin, to distinguish whe
ther he intended moral evil or
ceremonial impurity.
ov diKauodijfferai Trdffa ffdp^.~^ No
flesh shall be justified : ov . . wag
with a verb interposed has the
force of a universal negative, the
ov adhering to the verb ; as in
Luke i. 37. ; 1 Cor. xv. 29. The
two words when following one
another are usually (but not
always) taken in the sense of a
particular "not all." Compare,
however, Apoc. ix. 4., and above,
The expression ov . . TTO.Q in the
first sense is not altogether
strange to classical Greek. Comp.
Plat. Phsed. 91. E.: Trorepov l$t],
TOVQ euTrpoader Xoyovg OVK
ffQe ij TOVQ JJLEV TOVQ o ov ;
It is fuller and more direct than
ovc)(e, and therefore more em-
phatic. The passages in which
TTCLQ or ele comes first, such as
VEB. 21.J
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
131
21 his sight ; for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But
now the righteousness of God without the law has been*
Apoc. xxii. 3. : irav KaruQefJia OVK
ecr-ai en ; or Matt. x. 29. : ev e
avTwv ov 7T<7trai, are the best il
lustrations of the nature of the
usage.
The whole clause is taken from
Ps. cxliii. 2. : on ov SiKaiuOiifferai
erwTTiov CFOV TTO.C; o)) , for which
latter words the Apostle substi
tutes Traaa aap, not without an
allusion to the weakness of the
flesh in the presence of God.
Comp. Matt. xxiv. 22. : OVK ar
eawdr) /rdo-a <rap.
$ia yap v6pov )t for by the lawJ^
We naturally ask why "for?"
What connexion is there between
the inference and the reason as
signed to it ? To us the know
ledge of sin would seem like the
first step to justification, not op
posed to it.
For the answer to this question
see Essays on "Justification,"
and on the " Law as the Strength
of Sin," in which the antagonism
is pointed out between the law
as the knowledge of sin, and the
after sense of acceptance and
forgiveness. Comp. Rom. vii. 7.,
8. : "I had not known sin, but
by the law : for I had not known
lust, except the law had said,
Thou shalt not covet. But sin,
taking occasion by the command
ment, wrought in me all manner
of concupiscence. For without
the law sin was dead."
" Without the law there is no
transgression;" or, as we might
say "Without conscience there
is no sin." No man, therefore,
can be justified by the law or con
science ; for this is what makes
sin to be what it is. The nature
of sin arises out of the knowledge
of sin, which is derived from the
law.
21 23. But now, independent
of the law, yet not without wit
ness from the law, the righteous
ness of God has been manifested
forth a righteousness of God
unlike that of the law, through
faith in Jesus Christ, unto all
who have faith ; for there is no
difference, for all have the same
need, all alike are freely justified.
21. vwl Se .] It has been argued
that vwl does not here refer to
time, because in what has pre
ceded there is no express mention
of past time. Yet what the
Apostle has been saying pre
viously does refer to the prior
dispensation.
Although it is true that vvv
and vwl are frequently used by
St. Paul to express the conclusion
of an argument or the summary
of a previous statement, yet it is
more probable that in this passage
he is referring to time. It is a
thought ever present to his mind,
that now is the age of the Gospel,
the time of fulfilment, not of an
ticipation ; the latter days which
all former times pointed to, in
which the truth is living, present,
and mighty among men. He
loves to oppose Trore per vvvlle,
as they had followed in his own
life, and as they seemed to follow
in the dispensations of God to
man. And where, as in this
passage, the contrast of nore pev
is omitted, still the thought of
the Gospel as neither past nor
future, but present and immediate,
remains. Compare below, ver. 26.
iv TW VVV KCLlpto) . V. 11. $1 OV VVV
rffv KctraXkayriv e\aofj.ev : xvi.
K 2
132
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[OH. III.
, SiKaiOCTVVr) Se 0OV Slot 22
TOV VOjJLOV KOL TO)V
TTtcrrews ypicrrou 1 , eis Tra^ra? 2 TOV? TncrTevo^Ta?. ov yap
/\i I I
eorriv 8iacrTo\TJ Tra^Te? yap rjfJiapTOV KGLL vcrTepovi/Tat T^? 23
80^779 TOU ^eov, SiKdiovfJievoi Scopeav Trj CLVTOV -^apiTi Sia 24
TO 6 #eo5 i\a(rTTJpiov Sta moTea>5
re avrou a/xa-
2 Add /cal 7rl Travray.
26., juLVffrrjpiov yjpovoiQ aiwvioiQ ve-
fie vvv.
man
fested.^ This righteousness no
longer resides only in the bosom
of God, " a mystery since the
world began ; " it has been called
forth into light and may be seen
of men ; cf. chap. xvi. 25. ; Eph.
iii. 8, 9. The perfect marks the
continuance of the manifestation:
it is not only a point in past time,
but living and present.
jjLaprvpovfjiivr), witnessed.^ Comp.
chap. i. 2. 17. ; Acts, x. 43.
The Gospel is independent of
the law, and yet the law and the
prophets bear it witness. They
speak of justification by faith,
Gen. xv. 5, 6., of the just who
live by faith, Hab. ii. 4., of for
giveness of sins, Ps. xxxiii. 1, 2.,
of the nearness of God to man,
Deut. xxx. 14., of the remnant
who were to be saved, Isai. x. 23.,
of the deliverer out of Sion, Isai.
lix. 20. ; but these scattered rays
are very different from the truth
of Christ, taught by St. Paul.
VTTO TOV vopov,^ forms a verbal
antithesis to x w i vo/dov.
22. diKatoavvr) Se.] But a
righteousness of another kind,
of God through faith in Christ,
unto all that believe.
Triorfvovrae] answers to ta
Triorewe, as Tra^rac to TTUQ o Koalas,
in ver. 19. The latter is further
emphasised by the clause ov -yap
effnv diaffToXi] (Comp. chap, x, 11,
12.), the reason of which universal
need of salvation is, in ver. 23.,
laid in the universal sinfulness
of the prior dispensation, the
statement of which again serves
as a kind of support of the truth
with which it alternates, in ver.
24., the free gift of the grace of
God.
Travrac Kct ir
Though the addition KCII tTrl
TO.Q of the Tex. Rec. is supported
by insufficient MS. authority
(A. C.f.g. v.\ and may have arisen
from a double reading of etc and
?rt noted in the margin (ait inl
Travrae), the repetition is not
unlike the manner of St. Paul.
Of the two prepositions, etc re
presents the more internal and
spiritual relation of the Gospel
to the individual soul, as ITH, its
outward connexion with man
kind collectively.]
23. fipapTov, have sinned."] In
classical Greek, and still more
often in the Greek of the New
Testament, the aorist is used with
out any precise notion of time,
where in English the perfect
would be employed to mark the
connexion of a past event with
present time, or the present to
express a general statement.
Compare TrpoeOEro, v. 25. ; *e-
KXeiadr), V. 27.
VER. 2225.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
133
manifested, being witnessed by the law and the pro-
22 phets ; even the righteousness of God which is by faith
of 1 Christ unto all them 2 that believe : for there is no
23 difference : for all have sinned, and come short of the
24 glory of God ; being justified freely by his grace
25 through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom
God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith*,
Add Jesus.
Not the
image of God in which man was
created, an interpretation which
is supported in some degree by
1 Cor. xi. 7. avijp . . . ft/cwv
KCU 56a Seov : nor the praise or
approval of God, for which latter
sense comp. John, v. 44., xii.
43. ; but rather a higher spi
ritual state, an ideal which shall
one day be realised, the king
dom of heaven, the manifestation
of the sons of God, presented
under another aspect. Comp. 2
Cor. iii. 18.: "But we all,
with open face beholding as in a
glass the glory of the Lord, are
changed into the same image
from glory to glory ; also, Rom.
v. 2. " This grace wherein we
stand and rejoice in hope of the
glory of God." For vcrrepovvTai
comp. Heb. xii. 15.: p-rj TIG
airo TTJQ
24. SiKcttovpEvot ^ojpeav."] Some
regard this as the principal
clause, expressed by a participle,
instead of a verb : " Having
fallen short of the glory of God,
they are justified freely." It is
better to lay the emphasis on
Supeav, and take cJi/ocuoujuei oi with
an allusion to ^i/caioo-i;^, in ver.
22. : There is no difference,
for all are sinners, and fall short
of the kingdom of heaven, and
2 Add and upon all.
in that they are justified they are
so freely by the grace of God."
a7ro\u7-|0(u0-W, redemption,"] as
of a captive from slavery. Comp.
Gal. iii. 15.: xjotoroe vjude
iZYiyoparrev, and our Lord s own
words, Matt. xx. 28. : " The Son
of Man came not to be minis
tered to, but to minister and to
give his soul a ransom for many."
25. ov 7TjOO0ro,3 = exhibited,
set forth to view, as in Ps. liii.
3., and Thuc. ii. 34., ra /ueV oa-
TO. TrpOTidevrai rdv uTroyevoperiov.
Comp. i iv^t&iv and Trefyavepu)-
TCLL : also Gal. iii. : dig KCIT
\r}aovQ ^jOtoroG Trpoe-
iXaffTi ipiov~\ has three senses
given it by commentators on this
passage : First, as in Heb. ix.
5., " mercy-seat," a meaning
of the word supposed to have
arisen from a misconception of
the LXX. respecting the Hebrew
rp23, the covering of the ark,
which they wrongly connected
with "123, to expiate or cover
sin. This interpretation is too
obscure and peculiar for the pre
sent passage : (1.) it would re
quire the article ; (2.) it is in
appropriate, because St. Paul is
not here speaking of the mercy,
but of the righteousness of God ;
(3.) the image, if used, should
be assisted by the surrounding
K 3
134
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
. III.
n, el? eVSeifw Trjs SiK<uocrw7?s CLVTOV, Sia TT)I> Trdpecriv
TTpoyeyovoTw a^aprrnjidriov eV rfj avo^y TOV Oeov,
TTJV l
TTS
CLVTOV iv rw vvv
Om. ri\v.
phraseology. Two other expla
nations offer themselves : either
(1.) l\a.ffTi]pLov may be a mascu
line adjective in apposition with
6V, " whom God set forth as pro
pitiatory," or better, (2.) a neuter
adjective, which has passed into
a substantive, whom God has
set forth as a " propitiation," like
crwr/yptoj jEx. xx. 24. ; cf.xxix.28.
$ta Tr/crewe tv T<*> avrov a /juart.j]
No such expression occurs in
Scripture as faith in the blood,
or even in the death of Christ.
Nor is tr iff Tie followed by ii>
in the New Testament, though
faith, like all other Christian
states, is often spoken of as ex
isting in Christ. ( Gal. iii. 26.)
The two clauses should there
fore be separated, " through faith
by his blood."
<C V%eiiv rijc diKatoffvvrje av-
rov. ] There are three ways in
which this manifestation may be
conceived: (1.) as the life and
death of Christ are an example
to all mankind ; (2.) as His
death was the penalty for sin ;
(3.) as He is the sum of that
revelation which the Apostle
terms " the righteousness of God
through faith by his blood ; " the
latter words being an explana
tion from the objective side of
what Sta 7r/oTW expresses from
the subjective, and connecting
with iXaffrrjptov as c>ia TriaretoQ
with ^iKaiovfjievoi. Comp. v. 9. :
EiKaiov/jiEvoi iv TV a tfjiari.
Sid ri]v TrapEffiv r&v irpoyEyo-
VQTUV a/zajorj^uaVw) , because of
the letting go of sins that are
These words are trans
lated in the English Version
" for the remission of sins that
are past." To this it may na
turally be objected : " Why of
sins that are past, rather than
of sins in general." Sins are
past to the individual when they
are forgiven ; but St. Paul is not
here speaking of individuals, but
of the world, in which they are
ever going on. The words of
the Epistle to the Hebrews, ix.
15. flC a.7TO\VTp(i)fflV T(t)V ETTl TT)
TTpwTrj SiaOfiKri TrapaScto ewr, offer
an apparent rather than a real
parallel. Nor is there any trace
of the word ndpEffie (which is
not found in the New Testa
ment except in this passage) oc
curring elsewhere in the sense
of " forgiveness."
The natural translation of the
words is : " Because of the let
ting go or omission of past sins."
That is the reason why God
manifests forth his righteous
ness, because formerly he had
hidden himself, and seemed not
to observe sin. "The times of
that ignorance God winked at,
but now commands all men
everywhere to repent." There
was a moral necessity which
made the old dispensation the
cause of the new one. God was
not willing that men should be for
ever ignorant of his true nature.
On the other side it has been
argued, that when past sins are
spoken of, it is not necessary to
think of them as the sins of a
past world, or a prior dispensa
tion. The Apostle is laying
stress on the fact that " at this
VER. 26.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
135
by his blood, to declare his righteousness because of the
letting go* of sins that are past through the forbearance
26 of God, for the declaration of his righteousness* at
very time a new revelation was
made to man. * Those who re
ceived this new revelation re
garded their sins as past in refer
ence to it ; and so the Apostle
himself regards them. According
to this view, the sense of the
passage could be brought out
more clearly if the clause Sid rrfv
rd)v TrpoytyovoTW apap-
were translated " for
the remission of their past sins,"
the article referring back to the
23rd and 24th verses. The word
irapeffts is rendered a^co-ic by He-
sychius, and occurs in the Epis
tles of Phalaris in the sense of
remission of a debt.
Once more, to resume the other
side of the argument, it may be
truly urged that the words iv rfj
avoxrj rov deov, v. 26., agree better
with the thought that God had
passed over the former sins of
the world "in his long-suffer
ing," than to his having forgiven
them. Long-suffering is not the
word to apply to the forgive
ness of sins, but rather to the
period before they were forgiven,
or to the delay in taking ven
geance for them. And on the
whole it seems better to sup
pose that St. Paul refers, though
obscurely, to that "mystery
which was kept secret since the
world began," Rom. xvi. 26., of
which he elsewhere speaks, than
that he uses words without point
or in doubtful significations.
26. (.v rfj avo^y TOV Seov, by
the long suffering of God. ] These
words are closely connected with
what precedes; "the overlooking
of sin " was an act of mercy.
Comp. ix. 22., where the delay
of appointed vengeance is also
spoken of as mercy : " But if
God, willing to manifest forth
his wrath, and to make his
power known, endured with
much long suffering the vessels
of wrath appointed unto destruc
tion."
rrjv ei eiiv rrc
avrov, for declaration of His
righteousness. ,] Not, as in the
English Version, a mere resump
tion of the previous etc tvdeiZtv,
" for the manifestation, I say, of
his righteousness at this time."
The words rrpbg TTIV eVeiiv rfjg
SiKatoffvvrjs are in juxtaposition
with kv ry dvo-%TJ rov Seov, and
closely connected with Sid rrjv
TrdpEffiv, as kv TM vvv Kcupu cor
responds to TtpoytyovoTUV a^uajO-
T-qparuv. It was partly owing
to the long suffering of God, that
he " winked at " past sins ; but
there was likewise a further ob
ject, that he should set forth
His righteousness at the time
appointed. He hid himself that
He might be revealed. The ma
nifestation of His righteousness
was the counterpart of His
neglect and long suffering.
When the eVSti&e was first men
tioned this point of view was
not touched upon ; it is now in
dicated by the article. Comp.
for a similar mode of connecting
the two halves of the dispensa
tion, ver. 20. : " The law came
in that sin might abound, but
where sin abounded, grace did
much more abound."
K 4
136
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[OH. III.
eis TO eu>cu OLVTOV Succuoz> Kal SiKcuowra rov IK
Irjcrov.
IIov ovv rj /cav^cris ; e^e/cXetcr^. Sia TTOLOV vopov ; 27
rail epya)v ; OV^L, a\\a Sta VOJJLOV mcrrea)?. Xoyidju,e#a 28
yap Si/ccuoucrftu TTtcrret avdpomov 1 ^wpls epyw vopov. if] 29
9 IovSaia>z> 6 0os \LQVQV, ou^l 2 Acal iOv&v ; val Kal iOvwv,
tl Trep 3 els 6 #eos os St/caiwcret Tcepiro^v IK Trtcrrew? /cat so
a o5i>, TTicrrei Si/catoDaflat
O.VTOV
That he may vindicate his
ways, and be the justifier of him
that believes, an epexegesis of
TTJOOC Ttjv eV2aiv, " that his own
righteousness may be clear, and,
as a further step, that he may
clear the believer in Christ."
27. Hoy ovv rj itai%i}<r<, where
then is boasting ?"] Comp. 1 Cor.
i. 31.: "He that glorieth, let
him glory in the Lord." The
boasting of the Jew has no room
left for it; it has been excluded
by faith.
E^K\iff9r), it has been excluded."]
Such is the result of the argu
ment which preceded. " Upon
what principle ? " the Apostle
further asks, applying the word
vofjLOQ in a new sense to TTIOTIC as
well as epya. The " law of
faith " is another name for the
Gospel, as the " Jew inwardly "
for the believer, and the " Israel
of God " for the church. For the
paronomasia compare vii. 21.,
Kb) apa TOV VOJJLOV TV i\ovri
Trotelv TO K(i\6i f , on tfjioi TO
TrapuKEiTai : ii. 14.^ OTCLV
.... yap edvr) TO. TOV vopov TTOIW-
fftv, OVTOL fdfjov fjiri e^oi TEG eav-
TO~IQ dalv vofj-og : and viii. 2., 6
yap vofjog TOVTrvevparoQ TfJQ ^i}fJQ.
28. \oyi6pQa ovv, we consider
then."] Let us hear once more
the conclusion of the whole
Add 5e .
matter : " We consider that
man is justified by faith, with
out the deeds of the law."
When the expression "without
the deeds of the law " is used,
does this mean without the deeds
of the ceremonial or the moral
law, or without the fruits of faith,
or without love, or without holi
ness ? or, when the Apostle says
"justified," does he mean thereby
to distinguish "justified" from
" sanctified," or a first from a se
cond justification, or to identify
justification with baptism or with
conversion? On such questions,
in past times, have hung the fates
of nations and of Churches. May
we venture to supply the Apo
stle s answer to them ? He might
have replied, that he meant
only that men were justified from
within, not from without ; from
above, not from below ; by the
grace of God, and not of them
selves ; by Christ, not by the
law ; not by the burden of ordi
nances ; but by the power of an
endless life. Comp. "Essay on
Righteousness by Faith."
29. Ji lov^aiwv o SEOQ novov ;
Is he the God of the Jews only ?]
As in chap, iv., where the fact of
Abraham s being j ustified by faith
is immediately coupled with the
other fact, that he was justified
in uncircumcision, that he might
VER. 2730.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
137
this time : that he might be just, and the justifier of him
which believeth in Jesus.
27 Where is boasting then ? It has* been excluded.
28 By what law ? of works ? Nay : but by the law of
faith. For 1 we conclude that a man is justified by faith
29 without the deeds of the law. Is he the God of the Jews
only ? is he not also of the Gentiles ? Yes, of the
30 Gentiles also : seeing it is one God, which shall justify
the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through
1 Therefore.
be the father of all them that have
faith ; as in Gal. iii. 25 28. ;
when faith comes, all mankind
are one in Christ Jesus ; as in
the discourse on Mars hill, Acts,
xvii. 26., the unity of God in
sensibly leads on the Apostle to
speak of the unity from man ; so
in the present passage, the other
aspect of the great theme flashes
suddenly upon the Apostle s
mind. He had already said, that
the righteousness of God was
revealed unto all them that be
lieve. Now, he expressly in
cludes the Gentile in the circle
of the faithful.
30. el TTEP els o ede.] For
God, as the law said, is one
God (Deut. vi.4.); one in another
sense too, knowing no distinction
of circumcision or uncircumci
sion, barbarian, Scythian, bond
or free.
OQ (UKouwflTft, who will justify."]
The future is used with reference
to the day of judgment ; or better,
more generally with a view to
the completion of a work, which
in this world was but beginning,
whether in each individual or in
mankind generally.
EK TTIOTEIOQ and CUtt T7/ TTlffTE W.l
What distinction can be made
between the uses Of these two
prepositions ? We can hardly
believe that the Apostle uses them
ironically, as some have sup
posed ; as though he said, the
difference between the gift of
salvation to Jew and Gentile is
about as great as the difference
between the prepositions EK and
oia. It may be suggested, that
EK iriaTEti)Q be taken with the
substantive, and eta r% TT/OTCWC
with the verb, " There is one God
who will justify the circumcision
that is of faith (i. e. not that cir
cumcision which is outward in
the flesh), and the uncircumcision
through faith ; " or, in other
words, "Who will justify faithful
Israel and the Gentiles equally
through faith." The expression,
TTEpiTopiv EK TTtorewc, is thus made
a sort of paronomasia, like v6p.os
TTiorewe. Comp. Col. ii. 11.:
Treptrofj.)) TOV y^ptarov. Conjectures
may also be hazarded that the
Apostle has employed EK TTIOTCWC
to denote the natural inward
connexion of faith and circum
cision, which did not equally
exist in the case of uncircumci
sion ; or as a better antithesis to
e epywi/, which (and not Si tpyw> )
would have expressed the tenet
138
EPISTLE TO THE EOMANS.
[CH. III.
iav SLOL TT)S 7ricrre&&gt;9. vopov ovv Karapyou/xei SLOL 31
rfjs TTicrreo)? ; JLIT) yeVotro, dXXa VOJJLOV i<TTaz>Oju,ez>.
against which he is contending
(cf. iv. 2.), and which he may be
supposed to have in his mind.
It is perhaps safer to discard
such refinements and say only
that we have a similar awkward
ness of expression to that which
occurs in chap. v. ver. 7., where,
as here, different words appear
to be used where we should ex
pect the same (vTrep Stco/ov, vnep
rov ayaQov). Compare, as in
some degree parallel, Gal. ii. 16. :
ov fitKatovrai avOpcj-
popov, idv JJLTI 3ta
e
31. Do we then make void the
law through faith ? That be far
from us. Nay: we establish the
law. But how so ? We might
reply, in the same sense that our
Saviour said, " I do not come to
destroy the law, but to fulfil ; "
to establish the law by requiring
obedience to a higher law, and
making obedience to the law in
any degree possible. The con
text, however, requires us to
narrow our interpretation : either
(1.) with reference to vop.oQ rijQ
Tr/orewe in ver. 27., we establish
the law, in that we have a new
VER. 31.]
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
139
31 faith. Do we then make void the law through faith ?
God forbid : yea, we establish the law.
law instead of an old one, a law
of faith instead of a law of
works; or, as it is further de
veloped hereafter, " Christ, the
end of the law to every one that
believes." Or, (2.) with reference
to what follows: "We establish
the law, in that the law says,
that Abraham our father was
justified by faith and not by
works." Neither of these para
phrases suits the connexion. The
first lays too much stress on the
words vopog rfjg Tr/crrewc, which
are but a passing expression, too
far off to explain the allusion in
iffTaropev. The second is
inconsistent with the adversative
ri ovv, of the next Chapter. Most
probably, the Apostle is either
referring to the commencement
of the chapter, in which he had
proved all men to be under sin
from the law, or following a
similar train of thought. In
this sense we establish the law,
because we appeal to it to con
vict men of sin; and this con
viction of sin is an integral part
of the dispensation of mercy,
both in the individual and in the
world. Comp. ver. 21.
140 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
els & $ebs os 5iKCUc<ret. iii. 30.
LET us turn aside for a moment to consider how great this thought
was in that age and country; a thought which the wisest of men had
never before uttered, which at the present hour we imperfectly
realise, which is still leavening the world, and shall do so until the
whole is leavened, and the differences of races, of nations, of castes, of
religions, of languages, are finally done away. No thing could seem a less
natural or obvious lesson in the then state of the world, nothing could
be more at variance with experience, or more difficult to carry out
into practice. Even to us it is hard to imagine that the islander of
the South Seas, the pariah of India, the African in his worst estate,
is equally with ourselves God s creature. But in the age of St. Paul
how great must have been the difficulty of conceiving barbarian
and Scythian, bond and free, all colours, forms, races, and languages
alike and equal in the presence of God who made them ! The origin
of the human race was veiled in a deeper mystery to the ancient
world, and the lines which separated mankind were harder and
stronger ; yet the " love of Christ constraining " bound together in
its cords, those most separated by time or distance, those who were
the types of the most extreme differences of which the iiuman form
is capable.
The idea of this brotherhood of all mankind, the great family on
earth, implies that all men have certain ties with us, and certain
rights at our hands. The truest way in which we can regard them
is as they appear in the sight of God, from Whom they can never
suffer wrong ; nor from us, while we think of them as His creatures
equally with ourselves. There is yet a closer bond with them as our
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS. 141
brethren in the Gospel. No one can interpose impediments of rank
or fortune, or colour or religious opinion, between those who are one
in Christ. Beyond and above such transitory differences is the work
of Christ, " making all things kin." Moreover, the remembrance of
this brotherhood is a rest to us when our " light is low," and the
world and its distinctions are passing from our sight, and our thoughts
are of the dark valley and the solitary way. For it leads us to trust
in God, not as selecting us, because He had a favour unto us, but as
infinitely just to all mankind. It links our fortunes with those of
men in general, and gives us the same support in reference to our
eternal destiny, that we receive from each other in a narrow sphere
in the concerns of daily life. To think of ourselves, or our church,
or our country, or our age, as the particular exceptions which a
Divine mercy makes, whether in this life or another, is not a thought
of comfort, but of perplexity. Lastly : It relieves us from anxiety
about the condition of other men, of friends departed, of those
ignorant of the Gospel, of those of a different form of faith from
our own ; knowing that God who has thus far lifted up the veil,
" will justify the circumcision through faith, and the uncircumeision
by faith ; " the Jew who fulfils the law, and the Gentile who does by
nature the things contained in the law.
142 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
CHAP. IV.
AGAIN the Apostle appears as at the commencement of the third
chapter, either in the person of an objector, or as ready to answer the
objections of others, and puts a question which has, however, no
direct answer. He had asked above, " What advantage, then, had the
Jew, if Jew and Gentile are alike concluded under sin ? " This ques
tion in the previous chapter was shortly disposed of, as the Apostle
was hurrying on to enforce his main thesis, " that all mankind were
under sin." Now it returns upon us again in an altered form, no
longer asked in reference to the Jew whose prerogative is admitted
to have passed away, but to Abraham the father of the Jewish race.
It might be that the Jew had no advantage, but that Abraham had
what shall we say then ?
At the end of the second chapter the Apostle had almost declared
that Jew and Gentile were both alike ; of this he stopt short and
spoke in a figure of the spiritual Israelite. In the same way in the
fourth chapter, he answers the question which he himself raises, by
putting the spiritual in the place of the fleshly Abraham. " What
shall we say that Abraham found, our progenitor according to the
flesh ? or what shall we say, that Abraham our progenitor found
according to the flesh ? " The intended answer according to either
way of reading the question is " nothing ; " for what he found was not
an advantage of that kind for which the Israelite hoped ; it was an
advantage not according to the flesh, but according to the spirit.
But St. Paul avoids the harshness of this inference by a digression
in which he points out that the blessedness of Abraham was not of
works, but of faith. In this digression he takes up a thread of the
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 143
argument at the conclusion of the last chapter in which glorying is
excluded. " If Abraham were justified by works, he would have
whereof to glory : " this, however, is impossible, and expressly con
tradicted by the words of Scripture, which says, " Abraham believed
God, and it was counted to him for righteousness." This is the in
direct answer to the question, " What shall we say that Abraham
found, our progenitor according to the flesh ? "
Subordinate to this assertion of the general principle in the person
of Abraham, is the minor question respecting the time of which the
words were spoken " not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision," in
which little fact the Apostle read their universal import. Circum
cision came afterwards ; it had nothing to do with the faith or with
the promise that had preceded ; it only conveyed through Abraham
the privileges of which it was the seal to the faithful everywhere.
(Compare Gal. iii. 17.) The sign of circumcision was but the
accident of that higher relation in which the Patriarch stood already
to God and man. As in the last chapter the words, " a man is jus
tified by faith without the deeds of the law " (ver. 28.), were quickly
followed by the declaration (ver. 29.), that " God was the God of the
Gentiles also ; " so here the statement that Abraham " believed God,
and it was counted to him for righteousness," leads the Apostle in
stantly to think of him as the " heir of the world," a title with which
the pride of the Israelite delighted to invest him. Is he the father
of the Jews only, is he not also of the Gentiles ? Yes ; both aspects
of the Gospel are seen in him. And the narrative of the birth of
Isaac the calling of the living out of the dead is repeated by
the Apostle with a kind of triumph as a lesson of new and universal
interest.
144
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. IV.
TL ovv epovfJiev evprjKtvai A/Spaa^ TOP TrpoTrdropa rj^wv 4
/caret crap/ca 1 ; ei yap A/BpaafJi ef epywv eSiKmw^fy, e^et 2
.a } dXX ov Trpos deov? TL yap rj ypa^r) Xeyei ; 3
Se ^A/Bpaafj. rw #ea>, KOL eXoyicr^ aurw eis
rw Se epya^o/xeVw 6 /ucr^o? ou Xoyierai 4
1 epov/j.sv Af3paafj. rbv Trare pa ^u&&gt;v
IV. How then do we meet the
case of Abraham ? The Apo
stle replies by giving a spiritual
meaning to the narrative in Ge
nesis and to other passages of the
Old Testament.
TI ovv is adversative, not " what
then if the case be so with the
law, shall we say that Abraham
hath found," but a resumption of
the train of thought with which
the third chapter commenced, TI
OVVTO Tripirrvov TOV lovcWoy, which
was suppressed in what followed,
and again resumed at v. 9. and
suppressed. The Apostle once
more takes up the same point, but
in a softened tone, and is about
to show that Abraham the father
of the faithful is a middle term
between the old and new, as " the
Israelite indeed " was at the end
of chap. ii.
KO.TO. ffapKa, ] by some opposed
to Kara Trrevjua, comp. i. 3. 4.; what
then shall we say that Abraham
found, not according to the spirit
but according to the flesh ? comp.
Gal. iv. 29. Without introduc
ing the idea of this opposition,
the meaning will be nearly the
same, " What then shall we say
that Abraham found, as the por
tion of his fleshly inheritance,"
or " as receiving the sign out
ward, in the flesh," comp. Eph.
ii. 11. fcara trapxa may be also
taken with TOV TrpoTraTopa fj i
comp. 2 Cor. v. 16.,
Kara
TOV
: which of the two con
structions we adopt depends
partly upon the order of words
in the manuscripts, which is it
self doubtful.
2. el yap A^paajj, i tpyw t^t-
Kcuu)0rj, e-^ei Kav^na, for if Abra
ham were justified by ivorks, he
hath whereof to glory. ~\ These
words refer to the 27th verse of
the previous chapter, in which
glorying is excluded, not by the
law of works, but of faith: as if
the Apostle had said " What
shall we say that Abraham found,
our progenitor according to the
flesh ? For we are in danger of
contradicting ourselves if we
maintain that Abraham was
justified by works ; he would then
have whereof to glory. But in his
relation to God this is impossible,
for the Scripture expressly says,
* he was justified by faith. " Here
are two arguments to show that
Abraham was not justified by
works: (1.) from what pre
cedes, because he would have had
whereof to glory ; which is con
firmed (2.) by the statement of
Genesis which is to follow.
a\X ov TrpoQ S eo* , but not
before God.~] This clause may
be taken in three ways: (1.)
We may place a stop after K-av-
Xnna, and suppose what follows to
be an ejaculation, the very
abruptness of which gives em
phasis to the denial of the Apo
stle. " For if Abraham was jus
tified by works, he bath some-
VER. 14.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
145
4 What shall we then say that Abraham hath found,
2 our progenitor according to the flesh ? l For if Abraham
were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory ; but
3 not before God. For what saith the scripture ? But *
Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him
4 for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the
1 Our father as pertaining to the flesh hath found.
thing according to the flesh, he
hath whereof to glory." Nay,
says the Apostle, half forgetful
that the impossibility is already
implied ; before God this is im
possible. Comp. tyw Kav^fTiv
ev yjiiGTU) Irjcrov TCI 7rpO TOV -&OJ ,
Eom. xv. 17. Or (2.) The words
ou Trpog Seov may be taken with
ec>u-cud>0f?. But no, it was only
an external justification that
Abraham or any man could have ;
not a justification KpoQ $eov if it
was by works. Compare the
opposition of Ifiia dLKatoavvr) and r/
TOV Oeov (SuKctLoavvr), in x. 3. Or,
(3.) the last two clauses of ver. 2.
may be taken as one, and the ad
versative aXXct regarded as an
abrupt and imperfect expression
for "although." The Apostle
would say : " For if Abraham
was justified by works he had
whereof to glory in himself, al
though it is admitted not before
God." The latter words thus
become a qualification of the ob
jection rather than an answer to
it. For a similar wavering be
tween two opposite statements,
comp. chap. iii. 3. 5., v. 13. (which
also contains an attempt to meet
an objection arising out of a pre
vious train of thought), vii. 25.
The chief difficulty according to
this mode of taking the passage
is the failure of connexion with the
words that follow, which must
then be referred back to ver. 1.
VOL. II.
TL yap r/ ypafyi] \lyei ; for what
saith the scripture ?] Gen. xv.
6. from the LXX. li a part of
the quotation, but also adversa
tive, as in Rom. i. 17.
The faith of Abraham was not
first adduced by St. Paul. It is
enlarged upon by Philo, and was
familiar to the Jews. Though
not the same with a faith in
Christ, it was analogous to it :
(1.) as it was a faith in unseen
things, Heb. xi. 1719. ; (2.) as
it was prior to and independent
of the law, Gal. iii. 1719.;
and, (3.) as it related to the pro
mised seed in whom Christ was
dimly seen, Gal. iii. 8.
4. rw <) ipya^opiva), now to him
that worketh.^ A play upon the
word e joywy in ver. 2. ; " but it is
otherwise with him that works,"
&c. ce is adversative to the pre
vious verse. The Apostle is pre
paring to show that Abraham
did not " work." He lays down
an axiom drawn from common
life : " The worker has his
hire, of debt not of favour."
But this was not the case with
Abraham ; he belonged to the
other class, of those who have
faith without works.
That the stress of the Apostle s
argument falls partly upon \oyi-
treu seems to follow from the
threefold recurrence of the word,
as also from its signification of
"counted," "reckoned." Faith
L
146
EHSTLE TO THE KOMANS.
[On. IV.
Kara ydpiv, aXXa /caret ocpeiX^/m 1< ra Se /XT) epyao/x.rw, 5
Se CTTI To^ Si/caioiWa TOJ> acreflrj, Xoyierai 7)
avrov eis St/caiocrwTiz . KaOdirep KOI JauelS Xeyet, 6
KapLcrfJiov rov dvOpMTTOV a* 6 #eos Xoyierai St/caio-
crvvrjv ^copis tpyw, MaKapioi >v d^eOTjcrav al dvopiai KO! 7
cS*> 7TKa\v<fi0rjo-av al a/xa/mai* jua/capios dvrjp GJ ou /XT) 8
XoyuTTirai Kvpios dpapriav. 6 /xa/ca/xcr/xos ow ouro? CTTL 9
TT)Z^ TrepiTOfJLTJv, T) Km CTTI TT)^ aKpofivo-Tiav ; Xeyo/x,ei> yap
[ort] eXoyicrOrj rat *A/3padp, rj Trtcrrts eis St/catocrw^^.
77a>s ow IXoyicrOrj ; iv TrepLTOp^fj OVTL, rj iv aKpofivcrTia ; K
ov/c e^ TrepirofJifj, aXX e^ aKpo/Bvcrria, Kal crrjfjielov eXa- r
/Se^ TrepiTOfJirj^, cr^ayiSa TT;? St/caiocrw^s TT}S
TT}S e^ TT^ aKpopvcrTLa, ets TO el^at OLVTQV Trarepa
was counted, reckoned, to Abra
ham for righteousness. But it
cannot be said that reward is
" counted " of grace to him that
doeth works ; it is his due. A
slight obscurity arises from the
inaccurate use of the same word
in both cases, the real meaning
being, OVK tXoyiaQr) Kara X"P tv ?
a\\a ecrrt /car o0a \r?/za. The ex
pression is a Hebraism ; it occurs
also in Ps. cvi. 31 (said of Phine-
has, e\oyiffd>i avrweie %LKO.Loavvr}v\
and elsewhere.
5. The case of Abraham is lost
sight of in the case of mankind
generally. As elsewhere, faith
and works are diametrically op
posed to each other. The Apo
stle does not mean to say that it
is to him who partly or imper
fectly works that faith is imputed.
But he conceives the state of
faith and of works as antithetical
and mutually exclusive of each
other. Comp. xi. 6.: el SE
XapiTi, ovKtri k 6, epywv, eirei f) xPC
ou/cfc ri yiverai ^aptQ.
6 8. Similar to this is the
language which David uses of
the blessedness of him to whom
God imputes righteousness with
out works, of the forgiveness of
sins, the covering of sins, the
non-imputation of sins, Psalm
xxxii. 1, 2. The similarity is
not in the words, but in the
thought; justification and for
giveness of sins being two dif
ferent aspects of the same idea.
This is the true harmony of the
Old Testament and the New,
consisting not in minute coinci
dences of words or events, but in
communion of spirit ; David and
Isaiah saying at one time :
"Blessed is the man to whom
the Lord will not impute sin ; "
and, " Though your sins were as
scarlet, they shall be white as
snow." Arid our Saviour and
St. Paul at another time :
" Believe, and thy sins shall be
forgiven thee ; " and, " Being jus
tified freely by his grace, through
the redemption of Jesus Christ."
9. 6 fjiaKapLcrpor;^ not this
blessedness, but this declaration of
blessedness ; this word blessed, is
it applied to the circumcised only
VER. 511.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
147
5 reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. Bat to
him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justi-
fieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the
man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without
7 works, saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are
s forgiven, and whose sins are covered ; blessed is the
o man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. This de
claration* of blessing is it to the circumcision only that
it is spoken, or to the uncircuincision also? for we say
that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
10 How was it then reckoned ? when he was in circumcision,
or in uncircumcision ? Not in circumcision, but in un-
[i circumcision. And he received the* mark of circumci
sion, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he
had in his * uncircumcision
or to the uncircumcised also ?
cf. Gal. iv. 15. The Apostle
"goes off upon a word," which
he makes a stepping-stone to his
former subject. He might have
said, " All this applies to all
mankind, Jew as well as Gen
tile." But he prefers to reason
out his argument from the case
of Abraham in the Old Testa
ment. What more shall we say
of this blessedness ? does it be
long to the uncircumcision or to
the circumcision only ? For, not
to lose sight of our former in
stance, we assert that faith was
reckoned to Abraham for righ
teousness. Let us ask the fur
ther question: "How was it
reckoned to him ? " The answer
is, not in circumcision, but uncir
cumcision.
The argument may seem slight
to us ; it was forcible to the Jew.
The state which was odious and
almost loathsome to him, was the
that he might be the father
state in which the father of the
faithful found favour of God.
Abraham, too was once uncir
cumcised.
11, 12. And circumcision came
afterwards, as the effect not tho
cause, the seal not the instru
ment, of the faith which Abra
ham had had in a previous state.
The object of this was that he
might be the spiritual parent of
all those who like him have faith,
yet being uncircumcised, that the
righteousness that was sealed in
him might be counted to them.
There was a further object, that
he might link together in one
circumcision and uncircumcision,
and be a father of circumcision
to those who walk in the foot
steps of the faith, which he had
in his prior state. o-r/^eToj/, like
o-^pay/f, refers to the outward
mark of circumcision, which is
also a sign of the promise. KIQ
TO elvai ... etc ro \oyia. t not in the
L 2
148
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. IV.
TMV TTlCTTeVOVTtoV SlO, OLKpO/3vO"TLa$, 1$ TO
crdrjvaL aurots 1 TTJV SiKaioo vv qv, Kal warepa TrepiTOfjirjs, rot? 12
OVK K TTepiTOfJLJJ^ \LQVQVy dXXo, K(U TOCS CTTOi^OVCriV TO I?
TT?S tv aKpo/BvcTTLa 2 mareajs TOU Trarpos TI^V
ov yap Sta vo^ov rj eTrayyeXia TO> AfipadfJi TJ T&&gt; 13
avrov, TO K\rjpoi^6p,oi avrov cum Kocrfjiov 3 , dXXa
e*> TT;
1 /cai
thoughts of Abraham, but in the
purpose of God.
Tr\v %iKcnoavvr]v is a resumption
of ff(f)pay~i^a TYJQ ()ii:aio(rvvr}Q at the
commencement of the verse, as
T&V Triffrevoj Twv Sio. a.Kpov(TTia.,
and rijs iv cLKpo^varia TriffreioQ in
ver. 12. of the words r>/c Tr/crrew^
77/c tv 7"^ uKpo^vffTia, which pre-
cede. 3i aKpo^variaq is not mate
rially different from y uKpoSvcrria.
The notion of the mean or in
strument passes into that of the
state or circumstance.
Trare joa Trepiro^rjg,^ i. e. a father
conveying the benefits of circum
cision. Comp. the nearly pa
rallel expressions, Eph. i. 17. : 6
7rar/)p Tfjg &4&fj 2 Cor. i. 3. : 6
Trarfjp r&v oiKTipfjitity, and the pa
rallel thought in Rom. xv. 8, 9. :
"Now I say that Jesus Christ
was a minister of the circumci
sion for the truth of God, to con
firm the promises made to the
fathers; and that the Gentiles
might glorify God for his mercy."
It is not quite clear whether
the words aX\a /cat TOIQ arot^oiJ-
aiv refer to believing Jews, or to
believers in general, whether
Jew or Gentile. If the first,
they are a limitation on the pre
ceding clause : "A father of
circumcision to those who are
not only circumcised but be
lieving, who, like Abraham, have
the sign in the flesh, and also
walk in the footsteps of the faith
which he had when uncircum-
8 TOU Kocrpov.
cised." This mode of taking
the passage has the advantage of
retaining the words rote OVK in
their natural order. A want of
point, however, is felt in the
clause "which he had when uncir-
curncised." For although the faith
of Abraham might be generally
regarded as a source of blessing
equally to Jew or Gentile, " the
faith which he had when uncir-
cumcised " had no peculiar signi
ficance for the Jew. The rote be
fore aroi^ovaiv is also against this
way of explaining the clause.
And, notwithstanding the inac
curacy of expression, the form of
the first clause, ro7c OVK EK irepiro-
pijg jjioi ov, is so similar as to lead to
the inference that it must have
the same meaning with ov TV IK
TOV t 6fj.ov poror, in ver. 16.
It is simpler and better to re
fer aXXti KO.I TO~IQ aTOt^ovaiv to the
Gentiles. The meaning of the
latter part of ver. 11, 12. will
then be as follows : That he
might as he had faith himself
be the father of those who had
faith ; and as he was circumcised
himself, be a father conveying
the benefits of circumcision to
those who walk in the footsteps
of the faith which he had when
uncircumcised. Or, in other
words, that he might be the father
of the faithful, whether Jew or
Gentile, and convey to them the
privileges of Jews.
It does not follow that the
VJSR. 12, 13.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
149
of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised,
12 that the* righteousness might be imputed unto them 1 ,
and the father of circumcision* riot to them who are of
the circumcision only, but to them also who walk in the
steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he
13 had being yet uncircumcised. For the promise,
that he should be the heir of the world, was not
to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but
Add also.
class represented in the first
member of the division (TU~IQ OVK
in; TTfpLTOfj.fjc novov} are excluded
from the second ; any more than
in Gal. vi. 16., "As many as
shall walk according to this rule,
peace be on them, and mercy,
and upon the Israel of God," it
follows that the Israel of God
can be distinguished from those
mentioned in the first part of the
sentence. The division of the
Apostle is not logical, but spiri
tual ; that is, it is a division, not
of persons, but of the aspects
under which they may be re
garded. In the present passage
the importance of the second
clause has obscured the first.
Comp. for a similar imperfect
division the passage quoted above,
Rom. xv. 8, 9., and below, ver. 16.
13. The Apostle had been ar
guing that Abraham received
the gift of righteousness, not in
circumcision, but in uncircumci-
sion. He proceeds to gene
ralise his previous statement.
The words that follow, that it
was not " through the law, that
the promise was made to Abra
ham that he should be the heir
of the world," we may regard
either as the ground of what has
preceded, or a deduction from it.
That would be inconsistent with
the universality of the promise,
and with the express words of
Scripture, that " Abraham was
justified by faith." The reason
is partly gathered from what
precedes, partly repeated in what
follows ; the purport of which is
to show the diametrical opposi
tion of faith and the law, in their
nature and in their effects.
TraTtpa ro tQ 7riorvoi;<7t.] As in
Apocal. xxi. 7. : eo-o^ucu avrw Oeo.
, dat. of place.
avrov f.lva.1 TOV
The Apostle is alluding
to Gen. xv. 7. : eyw 6 $(.OQ 6 ea-
yaywj ore ec ^a jpac Xa\c!cuwv &are
^ovvai ffot TYJV y7]v ravrrjv K\rjpoyo-
pf] ff at. Compare also Gen. xvii.
5. : Trarepa TroXXwv idvtiv TedetKo.
&e; and xiii. 15.: on Traaav TI)V
Ka T (TTreppaTi ffov ewe
The Rabbis extended this pro
mise to the whole earth. So
Mechilta, upon Exodus, xiv. 31.,
quoted by Tholuck, " Our father
Abraham possesses the world
that now is, and that which is to
come, not by inheritance, but by
faith." In this passage the
Apostle has similarly enlarged
it. The expression may be re
garded either: (1.) as a hyper
bole, as Jerusalem is said in the
Psalms to be " the joy of the
150
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. IV.
TTLcrreco?. e yap o K VOJJLOV Kr^povopoi, u
/ce/ceVa)T(u rj TTICTTIS KCLL KaTTjpyrjTaL rj InayyeXia 6 yap 15
Z OJLCO? opyj]v Karepydt^rai. ov 8e ou/c * ecrrl^ vopos, ouSe
7rapd/BacrLS. Sia rouro CK Trurrecos, tVa /caret ydpiv, 19 TO 15
eivai fizfiaiav rrjv lirayyeXiav TTOVTI T> crTrep/x-art, ou ra> CAC
TOL> VQ^LQV ^LQVQV, dXXa Kal TO) e/c TTtcTTews AfipadjJL, os i<JTiv
1 ov 7&/> ow/c.
wliole earth," or as darkness is
said to have "come over the
whole earth " at the Crucifixion ;
or (2.) the promised land may be
taken as the type of the world.
On the one hand, it must not be
forgotten, in the explanation of
this and similar expressions, that
the world did not present to the
ancients the same distinct idea
and conception as to ourselves ;
nor, on the other hand, that the
thought of the promised land
was inseparable to the true Is
raelite from the thought of a
world to come. The words of
the book of Genesis themselves
might seem to the Apostle to
promise more than had been or
could be fulfilled in this world.
He was fixing his mind on some
thing higher than the occupation
of the promised land by the Is
raelites. It was this which gave
the promise to Abraham a new
meaning.
14. el yctjo ol IK vopov KXqpoyo-
yuot, for if they of the law be
heirs.^ When it is said that
Abraham is the heir of the
world, is it his descendants under
the law, who are to be regarded
as heirs with him ? That cannot
be, as faith would then be no
longer faith, and the promise no
longer a promise. What may be
termed the substratum of the
Apostle s argument, is the mutu
ally exclusive character of faith
and the law, separated as they
were by time, belonging to two
orders of ideas and opposed in
their effects on the heart of man ?
In the third chapter of the
Epistle to the Galatians, a simi
lar opposition is drawn out be
tween the promise, as a blessing,
and the law, as a curse ; and the
promise is, in like manner, iden
tified with the Gospel. The ar
gument from time is again used,
as showing the priority of faith.
15. For the law is the very
opposite of grace and faith and
the promise ; it works wrath not
mercy ; it takes men away from
God instead of drawing them
to him ; it makes transgressions
where they were not before.
ov t)e OVK tarlv I ojjoc, and where
there is no law.~\ Comp. ver. 20.
of the preceding chapter : " There
fore, by the deeds of the law shall
no flesh be justified in his sight,
for by the law is the knowledge
of sin." So here: "The law
worketh wrath, and where there
is no law there is no transgres
sion."
o35eovjcc0r<> ,] seems like a gloss
at first sight. It is not really so,
however, its apparent want of
point only arising from the form
of the sentence, which is more
adversative than its meaning.
Comp. Rom. xiii. 1. It may be
paraphrased, "and makes trans
gressions."
VER. 141G-] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
151
H through the righteousness of faith. For if they which
are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the
15 promise made of none effect: for* the law worketh
wrath : and l where no law is, there is no transgression.
is Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace ; to
the end the promise might be sure to all the seed ; not
to that only which is of the law, but to that also which
is of the faith of Abraham ; who is the father of us all,
1 For.
For a fuller explanation of
these passages, the reader is re
ferred to the Essay on the
Strength of Sin is the Law.
The real difficulty respecting
them arises from the state with
out law being an imaginary one.
We readily admit that, if any
where there is no knowledge and
no conscience, as in the case of
a child, a savage, or a madman,
there it is impossible there can
be transgression. Of such we
should say that they were not to
be judged by our standard ; that
what to our moral notions was
an offence was no offence to
them ; that in their case the
laws of civilised countries did
not apply. Our difficulty is to
conceive the same absence of re
sponsibility in rational being*.
The truth is, that there is no
absence of responsibility, except
in that imaginary state of which
the Apostle is speaking ; a state
without knowledge and without
law, and, therefore, conceived of,
as without evil and without
crime. This the Apostle de
scribes in the words " Where
there is no law there is no trans
gression ; " or, " sin is not im
puted where there is no law."
Only the law of which he is
speaking is not a mere external
rule, but within and without at
once, piercing "even to the di
viding asunder of the soul and
spirit." Hence it works wrath,
not merely in inflicting penalties
for sin, but as itself the punish
ment of the poor human creature
who falls under its influence.
16. Again the Apostle gathers
up in a conclusion the links of
his argument, not without allu
sion to his former statements
in ver. 4. 11. 12.: therefore,
that is, because it was not and
could not be of the law, the
promise was of faith, that it
might be according to grace, and
stand firm to all his spiritual
children, circumcised as well as
uncircumcised ; to all, that is,
who have the faith of Abraham,
who is the father, not of the Jew
only, but of us all.
in: 7Tt0Ta>r.^] Either >/ K\rjpo-
vofjiia. may be supplied from what
precedes, or r\ tTrayyeXta from
what follows, or, better still, the
ambiguity may remain, as in E.
V. u-a and EIQ TO waver in
meaning between "result" and
" object." Kara -^npir : eirj is omit
ted on account of the following
ctrat. TrcuTt r&&gt; tnrep^iart, that is, to
the children of the faith of Abra-
L 4
152
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. IV.
TTCLTrjp 7rdvT(t)V THJLO>V (/ox$(i>s ylypoLTTTai on Trarepa 7TO\\a>v 17
T@u<d ere) KarevavTL ov eVicrrevcrez 6eov, rov
OVVTOS TOV<$ VKpOl>S KOL Ka\OVVTO$ TO, fJLT} OVTa &)?
ovra. 09 Trap eA/TuSa e^> 5 eXTuSi eTrtcrreucre^, eis TO ye^e crftu 18
avTov TTCLTepa TroXXwz Idvojv Kara TO tipruJLevov Ourco? eo~rat
TO cnrepfAa crov. KCU /XT) dcrdevrjcras rfj Tricrrei /ca/rez o^crez 1 19
TO eauTou orojfjia [17877] veveKpoifJievov, eKaTovTaeTTjs TTOV
Kal Trjv vtKptocrw rrjs [JLTJrpas 5appa?, et? e TT^ 20
^ TOU ^eoi) ou SieKpiGrj rfj amcrTia, dXX e
ham as well as to the children of
circumcision, the whole seed spo
ken of in verse twelve (comp. Gal.
iii. 16., where r&&gt; o-Tr^uan is appli
ed not to believers, but to Christ).
rut EK TT/orcwr: either rut a-nippon
rov AfipaapEK TT/OTCWC, or rw GTrip-
{JLari EK itLcrrewQ rov Afipaap.
17. Even as the Scripture im
plies that Abraham was not the
father of one nation only, but of
many, Gen. xvii. 5. quoted lite
rally from the LXX.
KarEvavn ov ETrio-rEvtrEi S eoi/, be
fore God whom he believed. ] KCL-
Tivavn has been sometimes taken
in the sense of like " God whom
he believed, as though Abraham
the father of the Jewish race,
were to be regarded as the type
of " the God and Father of us
all." But such a parallel be
tween the creature and the Cre
ator is unlike the language of
Scripture, and the word Kari-
vavri) in six other passages where
it occurs, has always the mean
ing of "over against," "opposite
to." It is the genuine reading
in 2 Cor. ii. 17. (Ka.riva.rri 3^oi)),
where it can only have the sense
of "before," "in the presence
of," which must therefore be its
meaning in the present passage.
Either we may suppose that a
particular reference is intended
to the fact that these nations had
as yet no existence but in the
presence of God, who calleth
" the things that are not as
though they were ; " or the ex
pression may be merely designed
to set forth the solemnity of the
occasion and the reality of the
promise, as the angels of children
are said ever " to behold his
face," Matt, xviii. 10. ; or as in
Eph. i. 4., the Church is said to
be holy and blameless in his pre
sence. As if to realise it, St.
Paul transfers the scene of the
promise to the presence of God.
ov ETriarEvaEi .^ Attraction com
monly takes place only when the
relative would otherwise be in
the accusative case : here, and in
other comparatively rare in
stances, for the dative.
rov ^woiroiovvroQ rovg VEKpovg,
who quicheneth the dead,~\ con
tains a threefold allusion, (1.) to
the resurrection of Christ, cf.
ver. 24. ; (2.) to the quickening
of Sarah s womb ; (3.) to the
new birth of the Gentiles.
Ka,\ovvTOQ ra. pi) OVTCL WQ OJTCJ.J
Not " God calls things that are
not into being ; " the expression
is stronger God calls things
that are not, as though they
were indiiferently things that
are not, and things that are.
VER. 1720.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
153
17 (as it is written, I have made thee a father of many
nations,) before him whom he believed, even God,
who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things
is which be not as though they were. Who against
hope believed in hope, that he might become the
father of many nations, according to that which was
19 spoken, So shall thy seed be. And not as one weak in
faith 1 he considered his own body now dead when he
was about an hundred years old, and the deadness of
20 Sarah s womb : he staggered not at the promise of God
through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory
1 And being not weak in faith he considered not.
The words refer primarily to the
creation, which is a figure of the
admission of the Gentiles. The
same God who called the world
out of nothing, made Abraham
the father of a spiritual Israel,
when as yet there was none of
them. Comp. 1 Cor. i. 28. :
s\aro 6 -9"oc TU p.rj OVTCI, iva TO.
orra K
18. OQ Trap eA7r/a </>
<mvo-j , who against hope believed
in hope.~\ Who believed in hope
beyond or against hope, whose
faith supplied hope when there
was no hope. Abraham consi
dered not the grounds of hope or
of despair, but simply believed.
ftg TO yEj fVOcu avrov, that he
might become.~\ This was, strictly
speaking, the result (" and the
consequence was that he be
came"), but in the language of
the New Testament it is de
scribed as the object. Comp. v.l 6.
ovrwc form.] Compare Gen.
xv. 4. : "And he brought him
forth abroad and said, Look now
toward heaven and tell the stars
if thou be able to number them.
And he said unto him, So shall
thy seed be."
19. Kal prj aaQer. ryrr/fTTei Kc
A. B. C. ; OV KO.Ttv6r}(TV, &. G. f. g.
The first reading has far greater
manuscript authority ; it is urged,
however, that it is a correction
taken from Gen. xvii. 7. It
may be replied that the remem
brance of this passage ( A/3pac <ju
i7ref kv rr\ Ziavoia, avrov, Ae ywr, Ei
TtJ {.KCLTOVTaETti l yei f)(JTUl HOQj
Koi el r] 2appa ivvevYiKovTO. fYwV
re Eereu ;) is as likely to have been
in the Apostle s mind as in the
corrector s. For the general
meaning, compare Heb. xi. 12. :
" Therefore sprang there even
of one, and him as good as dead,
so many as the stars of the sky
in multitude, and as the sand
which is by the sea shore innu
merable." And ver. 19.: "Ac
counting that God was able to
raise him up, even from the
dead ; from whence also he re
ceived him in a figure." The
strangeness of the birth of the
Gentiles is parallel with the im
probability of the birth of Isaac.
20. ?c Se TYIV eTrayyeXtar rov
Seov, but at the promise of God.~\
These words are best taken after
fVfcWajuwftij Trj 7r/0Tt, or rather
after the one idea presented by
the contrast of ov cutKpidr) ry
154
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cri. IV.
ovf oa^ rw t&, gvng
to God,~] as though the blessin
were already received.
22. Therefore his faith was
counted to him for righteousness.
The stream of the Apostle s dis
course ends as it began.
23. And this passage in the
history of Abraham is intended
to be a lesson for us, who, like
him, are justified by faith. For
the meaning compare 2 Peter i.
20. : 7racra Trpofyrjreia ypatyiJQ IciaQ
ETrtXvffeiog ov yivtrai : that is, all
Scripture has a universal and
spiritual meaning ; and 1 Cor. ix.
9, 10. : "Doth God take care for
oxen ? Or saith he it altogether
for our sakes?" Compare the
Rabbinical Commentary Beres-
chit Rabba, quoted by Tholuck:
" What is written of Abraham,
is written also of his children ; "
also the expression in Gal. iv.
24., ciTtva kanv a\\r}yopoi)^f.va.
St. Paul drew no distinction
such as is familiar among our
selves, between the application
of Scripture and its original
meaning. To him its first and
original meaning was the great
truth of the Gospel.
24. vote TrLffrf.vova/u j iii the
English version, " if we believe."
Rather, who do believe, the be
lievers in God who raised up
Christ from the dead. The pa
rable of Abraham "receiving
Isaac from the dead in a figure,"
is slightly alluded to.
ry TTLcrTeL, Soi>9 $6av ra dew KOL TrXvjpocjioprjOels STL o 21
i S wares ICTTIV KOL Trourjcrai. Sio [KCU] eXoyicr^ 22
19 SiKcuocrvwjV. OVK eypdffrrj 8e Si OLVTOV JJLOVOV, STL 23
crOTj OLVTOJ, dXXa KOLL SL 77^0,9, ols /x,e XXet Xoyiecr#ai, 24
Toi9 TTicrreuovcrcz err! TOJ> lytipavTa lycrovv TOV Kvpiov
rjfjLwv IK v&cp&v, 09 TTapeSodr) Sia ra TrapaTTTc^uara r^^v 25
/cat rjyepOr] Sia r^ Si/cauocrw rjfJLWV.
24. For the use of the word
TraptSodr)., compare 1 Cor. xiii 3.,
Rom. viii. 30., Gal. ii. 20., Eph.
v. 2.
A difficulty arises in reference
to this verse, from the division
of the clauses. There would be
nothing to require explanation in
such a form of expression as
" Who died and rose again for
our sins and our justification."
But why " died for our sins and
rose again for our justification?"
May not our justification equally
with our sins be regarded as the
object or cause of Christ s death?
We might answer that St.
Paul often employs an antithesis
of words, where there is no anti
thesis of meaning. Compare, for
example, Rom. x. 9, 10. : "If
thou shalt confess with thy
mouth the Lord Jesus, and be
lieve in thy heart that God
raised him from the dead, thou
shalt be saved. For with the
heart it is believed unto righ
teousness, and with the mouth
confession is made unto salva
tion." In this passage, were we
to transpose the words righteous
ness and salvation, the meaning
would be unaltered. There is
no real opposition between them,
any more than there appears to
be here between " dying for our
sins, and rising for our justifica
tion."
Yet there is a certain analogy
on which the Apostle proceeds
in the last-mentioned expression.
. 2125.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
155
21 to God; and being fully persuaded that, what he has*
22 promised, he is* able also to perform. And therefore
23 it was imputed to him for righteousness. But it was
not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to
24 him; but for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, who
believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the
25 dead ; who was delivered for our offences and was raised
again for our justification.
The Christian is one with his
Lord, and his life, like that of
Christ, falls asunder into two di
visions, death and life, condem
nation and justification. Comp.
Rom. vi. 5, 6.: "For if we
have been planted in the like
ness of his death, we shall be
also in the likeness of his resur
rection : knowing this, that our
old man is crucified with him,
that the body of sin might be
done away." So in ver. 10, 11. :
" For in that he died, he died
unto sin once: but in that he
liveth, he liveth unto God.
Likewise reckon ye also your
selves to be dead indeed unto
sin, but alive unto God through
Jesus Christ our Lord." A still
nearer parallel is afforded by
viii. 10. : "But if Christ be in
you, the body is dead because of
sin ; but the spirit is life because
of righteousness. But if the
spirit of him that raised up
Christ from the dead dwell in
you," etc. Comp. also a more
subtle trace of the same thought,
in Rom. viii. 34., where KUTai^pit dJv
is opposed to tyepdeic. It would
not be in accordance with St.
Paul s usual language to invert
the order of these terms, or to
say, "who died for our justifica
tion and rose again for our sins."
Sin and death, justification and
renewal or resurrection, whether
in the believer or Christ, are
the parallel or cognate ideas.
Had the Apostle said, " Who
by his death was one with us in
our sins, by his resurrection one
with us in our renewal," in such
a mode of expression there would
have been nothing contrary to
his usual language. But, as has
been already remarked, in de
scribing the work of salvation,
forms of thought are fluctuating,
because they are inadequate ;
that which is sometimes the
cause being equally, from another
point of view, the effect, as in
the present instance, the cause is
not a cause, but a mode of ex
pressing a more general con
nexion between two ideas. (See
note on i. 4.) t We should err in
defining exactly that which is in
its nature inexact; better to lose
sight of the precise terms in the
general meaning. It is a slight
transition in the language of St.
Paul from the form "who ^ose
again for our justification," to the
other form, " who was one with
us in his resurrection." This
slight change is the source of
our difficulty.
25. <)ia ra TrctjOaTrra^uara //yuwr.J
(1.) as he bore our sins, (2.) as
he died by the hand of sinners,
(3.) as he died to do away the
law which was the strength of
sin, and death its penalty.
156 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
5 &i/ eTTKTTpfyr) irpbs Kvpiov, TTepiaipfirai rb /cctAi^a. 2 Cor. iii. 16.
THUS we have reached another stage in the development of the
great theme. The new commandment has become old ; faith is
taught in the Book of the Law. " Abraham had faith in God, and
it was counted to him for righteousness." David spoke of the for
giveness of sins in the very spirit of the Gospel. The Old Testa
ment is not dead, but alive again. It refers not to the past, but to
the present. The truths which we daily feel, are written in its
pages. There are the consciousness of sin and the sense of accept
ance. There is the veiled remembrance of a former world, which is
also the veiled image of a future one.
To us the Old and New Testaments are two books, or two parts
of the same book, which fit into one another, and can never be
separated or torn asunder. They are double one against the other,
and the New Testament is the revelation of the Old. To the first
believers it was otherwise : as yet there was no New Testament ; nor
is there any trace that the authors of the New Testament ever ex
pected their own writings to be placed on a level with the Old. We
can scarcely imagine what would have been the feeling of St. Paul,
could he have foreseen that later ages would look not to the faith of
Abraham in the law, but to the Epistle to the Romans, as the highest
authority on the doctrine of justification by faith; or that they
would have regarded the allegory of Hagar and Sarah, in the Epistle
to the Galatians, as a difficulty to be resolved by the inspiration of
the Apostle. Neither he who wrote, nor those to whom he wrote
THE OLD TESTAMENT. 157
could ever have thought, that words which were meant for a parti
cular Church, were to give life also to all mankind ; and that the
Epistles in which they occurred were one day to be placed on a
level with the Books of Moses themselves.
But if the writings of the New Testament were regarded by the
contemporaries of the Apostle in a manner different from that of later
ages, there was a difference, which it is far more difficult for us to
appreciate, in their manner of reading the Old Testament. To them
it was not half, but the whole, needing nothing to be added to it or
to counteract it, but containing everything in itself. It seemed to come
home to them ; to be meant specially for their age ; to be understood
by them, as its words had never been understood before. " Did not
their hearts burn within them ? " as the Apostles expounded to them
the Psalms and Prophets. The manner of this exposition was that of
the age in which they lived. They brought to the understanding of it,
not a knowledge of the volume of the New Testament, but the mind
of Christ. Sometimes they found the lesson which they sought in the
plain language of Scripture ; at other times, coming round to the
same lesson by the paths of allegory, or seeming even in the sound
of a word to catch an echo of the Redeemer s name. Various as are
the writings of the Old Testament, composed by such numerous au
thors, at so many different times, so diverse in style and subject, in them
all they read only the truth of Christ. They read without distinctions
of moral and ceremonial, type and antitype, history and prophecy,
without inquiries into the original meaning or connexion of passages,
without theories of the relation of the Old and New Testaments.
Whatever contrast existed was of another kind, not of the parts of a
book, but of the law and faith ; of the earlier and later dispensations.
The words of the book were all equally for their instruction ; ^ie
whole volume lighted up with new meaning.
What was then joined cannot now be divided or put asunder.
The New Testament will never be unclothed of the Old. No one
in later ages can place himself in the position of the heathen con
vert who learnt the name of Christ first, afterwards the law and the
153 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
prophets. Such instances were probably rare even in the first days
of the Christian Church. No one can easily imagine the manner in
which St. Paul himself sets the Law over against the Gospel, and at
the same time translates one into the language of the other. Time
has closed up the rent which the law made in the heart of man ;
and the superficial resemblances on which the Apostle sometimes
dwells, have not the same force to us which they had to his contem
poraries. But a real unity remains to ourselves as well as to the
Apostle, the unity not of the letter, but of the spirit, like the unity
of life or of a human soul, which lasts on amid the changes of our
being. The Old Testament and the New do not dovetail into one
another like the parts of an indenture ; it is a higher figure than this,
which is needed to describe the continuity of the Divine work. Or
rather, the simple fact is above all figures, and can receive no addition
from philosophical notions of design, or the observation of minute
coincidences. What we term the Old and New dispensation is the
increasing revelation of God, amid the accidents of human history :
first, in Himself; secondly, in His Son, gathering not one nation
only, but all mankind into His family. It is the vision of God Him
self, true and just, and remembering mercy in one age of the world;
not ceasing to be true and just, but softening also into human gen
tleness, and love, and forgiveness, and making his dwelling in the
human heart in another. The wind, and the earthquake, and the
fire pass by first, and after that " the still small voice." This is the
great fulfilment of the Law and the Prophets in the Gospel. No
other religion has anything like it. And the use of language, and
systems of theology, and the necessity of " giving ideas through
something," and the prayers and thoughts of eighteen hundred years,
h^ve formed another connexion between the Old and New Testament,
more accidental and outward, and also more intricate and complex,
which is incapable of being accurately drawn out, and ought not to
be imposed as an article of faith ; which yet seems to many to supply
a want in human nature, and gives expression to feelings which
would otherwise be unuttered.
THE OLD TESTAMENT. 159
It is not natural, nor perhaps possible, to us to cease to use the
figures in which "holy men of old" spoke of that which
belonged to their peace. But it is well that we should sometimes
remind ourselves, that " all these things are a shadow, but the body is
of Christ." Framed as our minds are, we are ever tending to confuse
that which is accidental with that which is essential, to substitute
the language of imagery for the severity of our moral ideas, to
entangle Divine truths in the state of society in which they came
into the world or in the ways of thought of a particular age. " All
these things are a shadow;" that is to say, not only the temple and
tabernacle, and the victim laid on the altar, and the atonement
offered once a year for the sins of the nation ; but the conceptions
which later ages express by these words, so far as anything human
or outward or figurative mingles with them, so far as they cloud the
Divine nature with human passions, so far as they imply, or seem to
imply, anything at variance with our notions of truth and right, are
as much, or even more a shadow than that outward image which
belonged to the elder dispensation. The same Lord who compared
the scribe instructed in the kingdom of heaven to a householder who
brought forth out of his treasure things new and old, said also in a
figure, that " new cloth must not be put on an old garment " or " new
wine into old bottles."
160 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
CHAP. V.
EVERY pause in the Epistle may be made the occasion for taking a
glance backward, and surveying the whole. In the construction of
the work we observe that the same threads again and again reappear,
tangling the web of discourse, and are never finished and worked
off. Thus the commencement of the fifth chapter is but the antici
pation of the eighth :
Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through
our Lord Jesus Christ.
There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in
Christ Jesus.
Compare again the following :
(1.) ch. iii. 1. What advantage then hath the Jew ?
9. What then are we better than they ?
27. Where then is boasting ?
iv. 1. What shall we say then that Abraham hath found, our
progenitor according to the flesh ?
(2.) ch. vi. 1. What shall we say then ? are we to continue in sin that
grace may abound ?
15. What then shall we sin, because we are not under the
law, but under grace ?
vii. 7. What shall we say then ? is the law sin.
(3.) Also the first verse of ch. ix., x., xi.
ix. 1. I say the truth in Christ in that I have great sorrow
for Israel.
x. 1. Brethren, my heart s desire and prayer to God for Israel
is, that they might be saved,
xi. I.I say then, hath God cast aside his people ?
where the Apostle thrice returns to the same point in his argu
ment, and begins again with the same theme.
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 161
Similarities of form and repetitions of thought may also be noted
in successive verses.
Compare :
v. 8 10. : " But God commended his love to us in that, while we
were yet sinners, Christ died for the ungodly. Much
more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be
saved from wrath through him. 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." These words are followed by the favourite
" not only so," which has already occurred at the begin
ning of ver. 3.
Compare also verses 15., 17, 18, 19., and i. 24., 26., 28. ; vii. 15., 19. ;
17., 22.; as instances of a structure in which the same ideas are re
peated rather than developed, and in some of which the form of the
first sentence prescribes the form of the second.
Many slight inaccuracies appear on the surface when we look at
the Epistle to the Romans through a microscope. It will be often
found that the successive clauses are not logically connected, or that
qualifications are introduced which are not duly subordinated to the
principal thought ; or the latter end of a sentence may seem to forget
the beginning of it, or for an instant the Apostle may hesitate
between two alternatives. But flaws of this kind disappear when
we remove to a little distance ; the irregularity of the details is
lost in the general effect. It might be said of the Apostle in his
own language that he is not speaking with " the persuasive words of
man s wisdom, but with demonstration of the spirit and with power."
It does not impair the force of what he says that he repeats a word,
or that he uses a particle where it is not needed, or that lie has so
framed a particular clause that its bearing on the next clause is doubtful.
It does not interfere with the unity of his writings that they have
not the symmetrical character of a modern composition. We often
speak of his style ; according to modern notions he can hardly be
said to have a style. He uses the rhetorical forms of his age because
VOL, II. M
162 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
he cannot help doing so : they are his only way of expressing him
self. He is not free to mould language with the hand of a master.
Yet, in general, his meaning is perfectly clear. If, following
Locke s rule, we read the Epistle through at a single sitting, the
broken thoughts come together, and a new kind of unity begins
to arise; the unity not of a whole with many parts aptly dis
posed, but of a single idea, appearing and reappearing every
where. The stream is one, though parting into two branches the
universality of salvation, and the doctrine of righteousness by faith.
To the end of the eleventh chapter there is nothing irrelevant,
nothing that does not bear on one or other of these two aspects of
the great truth. Imagine the writer full of these two thoughts, yet
incapable of mastering the language in which he wrote, incumbered
with formulas and modes of speech ; eager to declare the whole coun
sel of God, yet conscious of the way in which men might wrest it
to their own destruction ; seeking " to entwine the new with the old,
and to make the old ever new ; " and you would expect a composition
similar in texture to the Epistle to the Romans.
The Epistle is full of repetitions, yet the repetitions carry us
onward. The revelation of righteousness by faith is first made in the
seventeenth verse of the first chapter. Then, after the necessity for
it has been shown from the self-condemnation of the world, it is
repeated at the twenty-first verse of the third chapter. Here it
might seem as if the Apostle s task was over. But another link has
yet to be wrought into the chain. Is it the Apostle only who is
saying these things ? Saith not the law also ? Yes ; the doctrine
of justification and forgiveness of sins is contained in the book of the
law. Abraham as well as ourselves was justified by faith, and not by
works. Then the Apostle states his doctrine once more in the form
of a conclusion to an argument, and proceeds to display it as
embodied in the type and antitype, the first and second Adam. Still
he has to guard against inferences that might be deduced from
it, such as the antinomianism at which he had before hinted, " Let us
continue in sin that grace may abound, let us do evil that good may
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 163
come." Then he returns to the same note which he had struck
before, the confirmation of his doctrine from the book of the law.
Lastly, he fights the battle over again ; not now in the world at
large, but in the narrower sphere of the individual soul ; he describes
the last state of paralysis and death, until at length the agony is at
its height and the victory is won ; and, having now turned to view
the scheme of redemption in every aspect in reference to the
former state of the world, divided between Jew and Gentile, in refer
ence to the patriarchs, in reference to human nature itself, in refer
ence to possible consequences as well as the inward experience of
the soul, he repeats the conclusion which in chap. v. had been
already anticipated, chanting, as it were, the hymn of peace after
victory, " There is, therefore, now no condemnation to them which
are in Christ Jesus."
164
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. V.
Si
ia TOV Kvpiov
K TTicrrews elprfvrjv e^o/Ae^ Trpos rov Oeov 5
V Irjcrov ^ptcrrov, SL ov Kal rrjv irpocra- 2
[TT; mcrrei] 19 TT)Z> -^apiv ravTrjv iv 77
, Kal Kav^ojp.e6a ITT eXTTiSi rrjs 80^775 TOV deov.
ov p,6vov Se, a\\a Kal Kav^oj^eOa iv rais #Xu//ecrii>, etSdres 3
V.
, Therefore, being justified
by faith."] Therefore, i. e., as an
inference from what has been
said of the sinfulness of Jew and
Gentile, of the revelation of
Christ, of the witness of Abra
ham, and the Old Testament.
eiprivqv e^oficvj B. G. we have
peace ; t ^wjUEv, let us have peace,
A.C.&.f.g.v. Neither the MS.
nor the sense offers a sufficient
criterion to enable us to decide
between the two. We may say
with equal propriety, "Therefore
being justified by faith we have
peace with God," as though peace
were already involved in justi
fication (compare chap. viii. 1.):
or peace may be regarded as a
further stage in the consciousness
of what God has done for us.
" Therefore being justified, let
us go on to be at peace." eip-fivriv,
peace after strife, the opposite of
the state described in Romans,
vii. 7 25., 7rpoc rov 0toj , with
God. So in classical Greek, elpt it ijv
ayeiv, Troielffdai Trpog rira > Plat.
Rep. 465. B. ; Alcib. I. 107. D.
TTjooo-aywy//.] Cf. 1 Peter, iii. 18.:
7ra /jude Trpoaayayr) ra> fcw, not
with any idea of admission at a
court. eo^Ka/ifv, not we have,
but we have had. cor^ca/iev, in
which we stand, i. e. not merely
in which we are, but in which we
stand fast, as in Rom. xi. 20., and
commonly in the Epistles to de
scribe the perseverance of the
believer.
2 13. In the verses that
follow, the truth of justifi
cation by faith is brought home
to the feelings of the individual
believer. It is the source of all
that varied experience of joy
and sorrow, hope and love, which
each one is conscious of, which
arises out of the thought that
Christ died for us in our weak
estate, which is accompanied by
a yet stronger assurance, that He
who has begun the good work
in us will continue it unto the
end. At ver. 13. the external
and universal aspect of the work
of redemption is resumed, and
.displayed, as it were, on the
theatre of the world in the
persons of the first and second
Adam.
2. <)i ov Kal Ti]v Trpoflraywyj/reV-
^///,-a^f i>, by whom also we have
had the access.^ This clause may
be explained in two ways : (1.)
by connecting TI]V Trpoo-aywy^
and elg ri]v xapiv Tavrrjv, " by
whom we have (or rather have
had) access [by faith] unto this
grace wherein we stand," as in
the English version ; or (2.) the
word Trpooraywy/}, as in Ephesians
iii. 12., may be taken absolutely
and explained by 7TjOoo-aywy/)v
TTjOoc TOV Trarfjoa, which occurs in
ii. 18. of the same Epistle:
" Through whom we have had the
access by faith," the words etc rrjy
X&P iV Tavrrjv kv y eaT^KafjiEv being
regarded as the result or effect of
what has preceded, (so as to at-
2, 3.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
165
5 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with
2 God through our Lord Jesus Christ : by whom also we
have had the * access by faith into this grace wherein
s we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. And
not only so, but we rejoice* in tribulations also: know-
tain) "unto this grace wherein
we stand.
fccu Kav%u}peda, and rejoice,~\
or glory, not " of work," iv. 2.,
nor in ourselves, but in God.
Compare 2 Cor. xi. 30., xii. 1.
These words may be connected
either with e^o^v or with ^C ov
or better with iv
in hope of the glory of
Compare iii. 23. : vorepovirai rfJQ
c>or? TOV 3eou, and Romans vii.
19. : " For the earnest expecta
tion of the creature waiteth for
the manifestation of the sons of
God ; " and ver. 24., " For we are
saved by hope, but hope that is
seen is not hope/ Aa TOV Seov
is the fuller revelation of God,
exceeding not merely the glory
of the old covenant, but the pre
sent manifestation of the Gospel.
Compare 2 Cor. iii. 8. : Trwg
t paXXov rj StaKovla TOV TTVEV-
corcu kv os>?<
3. And not only so, but the
element of sorrow which is in this
present life cannot countervail
our joy. Kav^peda iv, we re
joice not " among," but " in," as
in Gal. vi. 14., answering to IV
iXirifii.
In the life of Christ, as well as
of his followers, is traceable the
double character of sorrow and
joy, humiliation and exaltation,
not divided from each other by
time, but existing together, and
drawn out alternately by the ex
ternal circumstances of their
lives. Christ himself said, " I,
if I be lifted up from the earth,
shall draw all men after me."
And just before he suffered, "The
hour is come that the Son of man
should be glorified." So he told
his disciples, Matt. v. 12.: "In
the day of persecution rejoice
and be exceeding glad." And
St. Paul, at the commencement of
the second Epistle to the Corin
thians, speaks as if sorrow brought
its own joy and consolation with
it ; you can hardly tell whether he
is sorrowful or joyful, so quickly
is his sorrow turned into joy.
There is the same mixed feeling
of triumph in affliction in the
remarkable words, 1 Cor. iv. 9. :
" I think that God hath set forth
us the apostles last, as it were
appointed unto death : for we are
made a spectacle to the world, to
angels, and to men." And even
where external afflictions are
wanting, the mere conscious*
ness of this "present evil world,"
" the whole creation groaning
together until now," the remem
brance of having once felt the
sentence of death in himself, will
make the believer rejoice with
trembling for what he feels within
or witnesses in others. Compare
the aphorism of Lord Bacon,
"Prosperity is the blessing of the
Old Testament, adversity of the
New."
M 3
166
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. V.
OTL rj #Xii//i9 vTrofJLOvrjv KaTepyd^tTo.i, rj Se VTTO^OVTI So/a/xi^, 4
07 e SoKifJir) \7TLoa 17 Se eX/Tris ou Karaicr^yv^i, OTL rj aydirrj 5
TOV Oeov GKK^vTaL iv rats /capStcu? rjfJLaiv OLOL rrvevfJiaTos
dyiov TOV So^eVros T;/^^. en yap ^yotcrro? OVTOJV TH^W acrOe- 6
z O)* ert 1 Kara Kaipov vrrep acre/3ft>i> aTTtOavtv (/x,dXtg yap uTrep 7
iov rts OLTrodavtlTai virep yap TOV dyadov Taya rt?
1 Om. ert.
4. The circle of Christian
graces comes round at last, from
hope, through the chastening of
sorrow, to hope again.
Tribulation, patience, expe
rience, hope never failing be
cause it is absorbed in love, are
the grades and stages of Christian
life. Or, in other word?, we suf
fer and are patient, and this very
patience assures us of our faith,
and this assurance changes the
attitude of our mind from patience
to hope.
cio/a/zj?,] passively for proved-
ness, confidence in self after trial.
Comp. 2 Cor. ii.9. : iVa yva) rr\v lo-
KI\L)\V vputr; andJames i. 3., where
the same words are used in a dif
ferent order: TO $oiclfjuov v
For a " golden chain " of the
same kind, compare the following
quotation from Schrettgen, i. 511.
"R. Pinchas filius Jair dixit,
1 Alacritas nos perducit ad inno-
centiam, innocentia ad pietatem,
pietas ad Spiritum Sanctum, Spi-
ritus Sanctus ad resurrectionem
mortuorum, resurrectio mortuo-
rum ad Eliam prophetam. "
5. ou^arat<T^vj/et,]literally,"doe9
not put to the blush," a Hebraism
for " fail." Compare Wis. ii. 10.
and Ps. cxix. 116.: pfj Karaicr^vyrjQ
fJLE O.7TO TTJQ TrpOff^OKiuQ fJiOV.
OTL ii a.ya.7rr).~] These words
follow Ko.Taiay(i)Vi. Hope never
faileth, because it has so strong
and ever diffused a motive in
love. Compare 1 John, ii. 5.,
1 Cor. xiii. 8. : "// ayairr} ovtteVore
TTtTrrtt." r/ otyaTrjy TOV Seov may
either mean the love of God
towards us, or our love towards
God; or rather both "because
we love him, and he loves us."
Compare Essay on the Abstract
Ideas of Scripture.
It may be asked, why should
hope never fail, because the love
of God is diffused in our hearts,
any more than because the
righteousness of God, or the
belief in God, is shed abroad in
us? The only answer to this
question is that love expressed
the feeling of the Apostle at the
time ; because dwelling on the
love of God, which showed itself
in the death of Christ (v. 8.), he
found a never failing support.
It may be truly said, in the in
terpretation of the New Testa
ment, that those "who ask a
reason for all things destroy
reason." The same association of
love and the Spirit occurs, though
in a different order, in 1 John,
iv. 12, 13.: "If we love one
another, God dwelleth in us, and
his love is perfected in us.
Hereby know we that we dwell
in him, and he in us, because he
hath given us of his Spirit."
6. There is great variation of
VER. 47.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
167
4 ing that tribulation worketh patience ; and patience,
5 experience ; and experience, hope : and hope maketh
not ashamed ; because the love of God is shed abroad in
our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.
6 For when we were yet without strength, yet 1 in due
7 time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a
righteous man will one die : yet peradventure for the *
1 Omit yet.
reading in the first word of this
verse. All the principal MSS.
and versions agree in the second
ert, which is omitted in the Tex-
tus Receptus : while the first is
supported by A. C. D ; el yap, v. ;
elq TI yap, G. f. g. v. Iren. 207. ; el
ye, B. It may be argued that the
occurrence of the second 2 is
against the genuineness of the
first, or, on the other hand, that
it has been the cause of the other
corrections.
It is not improbable that el yap,
ei ye, or el fie may be the true
reading, which, as in c. ii. 17.,
may have been altered to avoid
the anacoluthon, the real apodosis
being v. 9., as the apodosis of
v. 12. is v. 19. The word ITI
can hardly have been repeated
twice in the same clause.
en yap xp^roc.] Compare 1
John, iv. 10.: "Herein is love,
not that we loved God, but that
he loved us."
yap.] For this is the proof
of the love of God ; or this is
the reason why we should love
God.
ovrwi fi/jiojvaffdeviov en, when we
were yet without strength.^ The
point of these words is, not that
while we were yet sinners Christ
died for us, but rather that the
love of God, like that of a parent
to a child, was called forth by
our helplessness.
Kara Kaipbv, in due time. ] The
time of Christ s coming into the
world is everywhere spoken of as
" the appointed time." It is the
fulness of time, the meeting point
of the ends of the world.
7. This verse has been taken
in four ways :
(1.) Christ died for the ungodly:
this was a great instance of
love; for hardly for a just
man will one die ; yet per
adventure, for that exalted
character, the good man,
some one may even dare to
die ; or,
(2.) Yet, peradventure, for the
beneficent man, some would
even dare to die ; or,
(3.) Yet, peradventure, for the
good in the abstract, some
would even dare to die.
The distinctions between 3t-
/,-cuof and ayadog, which are re
quired by the first two modes of
explanation, are really assumed
to avoid the difficulty of the pas
sage. It is singular that the
word dyadog used of a person
occurs nowhere else in the writ
ings of St. Paul. To the third
explanation there are many ob
jections : (1.) the Apostle could
hardly have used duca/ov of a
person, and TOV a yadov of a
thing ; (2.) it is doubtful whether
the neuter TO ayadov would have
been used in the sense of moral
M 4
168
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. V.
Se
avTov ayirrjv 8
OVTtoV
Kal roX/xa airoOavelv)
15 77jU,a? 6 #05, OTL TL d/
virep rip&v OLTTtOavtV TroXXa) ovv i*aX\ov SiKcuaj^eVres vvv 9
IP TO) alfJiaTL avrov orajdrjo-o^eOa Si avrov airo rrjs opyrjs.
el yap e^Opol oVres KaTrjXXdyrjjJLev rw #w Sia TOV Oavdrov 10
TOV wov auTou, TroXXa) juaXXoz /caTaXXa/yeWes crtoOrjcrofJieOa
^ T 2? ^f? avTov, ov \LQVQV 8e, dXXa /cal /cav^co/x,e^ot e^ TO) 11
orav
good ; (3.) the notion of dying
for an abstract idea is entirely
unlike the language of the New
Testament, or of the age in which
the New Testament was written,
nor does it give the opposition
which the Apostle requires.
(4.) The remaining explanation
of dtjcctiov and TOV dyaOov makes
them synonymous. The Apo
stle corrects his former expres
sion, " For Christ died, when
we had no power to help our
selves, for the ungodly." But
this is unlike what men do for one
another ; for hardly will one die
for a righteous man. Admitting
that this statement requires cor
rection (which the word judXtc
already seems to imply), say, that
for the good man some one may
even dare to die, still the case is
different, for it was while we
were yet sinners that Christ died
for us. It is not necessary to
suppose any opposition between
SIKCILOV and TOV ayadov; the clause
vTrep ydp TOV ayaflov may be re
garded, not as subordinate to the
previous clause, but as parallel
with it, and dependent on the
preceding verse. The use of a
different word, though without a
distinction in meaning, may arise
either from a slight sense of the
awkwardness of retracting what
had just gone before, or from the
wish to avoid tautology. Com
pare John xvi. 21. : f] ywrj
OVK Tl fJLVT^jJiOVf.jei TlQ
for a similar repetition,
and for the thought, Rom. ix. 3.,
where the Apostle offers himself
to be accursed from Christ for
his brethren s sake.
8. But the case is otherwise
with the love of God to man ;
while we were yet sinners Christ
died for us.
A singular various reading
occurs in ver. 8, 9. ; on el en, in
ver. 8. G. f. Cyp. Hil., with which
is connected the omission of
ovr, in v. 9 A. G. f. g. v. Iren.
Cyp. Hil. The present a-uvior^ai
and the sense would be much a-
gainst this reading even were the
weight of MS. authority in its
favour.
9, If God took the first step,
much more will he complete the
good work in us. We could
hardly have expected that Christ
would have died for us ; but now
that he has died we may feel as
sured that he will save us from
the future penalty. The Apostle
is not distinguishing between jus
tification and sanctification ; but
passing onward in thought from
this world to the next. He is
expressing the natural feeling of
the believer, which admits of no
separation between the present
consciousness of the grace of
VER. 811.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
169
8 good man some would even dare to die. But God*
establishes his love toward us, in that, while we were
9 yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being
now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath
10 through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were
reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more,
11 being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not
God and the assurance of final
salvation.
iv TV afytan,] not by the sprink
ling of his blood, nor by his
death, but by the shedding of his
blood.
UTTO rfjc Ojoy^e.] Cf. 1 Thess. i.
10. : TOV pvopevov r//me CLTTO TTJQ
opyfjg rfJQ Epxpnevrji, : the punish
ment in the world to come opy//,
(1.) the wrath of God; (2.) its
effect; that is, the punishment
which it inflicts (as in Rom. iii. 8.).
8 11. Here is another and
another instance of the Apostle s
tendency to reduplication of his
thoughts. The 10th verse is a
repetition of the 9th, the 8th of
the 6th, the llth is a composi
tion of the 2nd and the 10th.
10. "We are reconciled to
God " (here and 2 Cor. v. 20.), or
(2 Cor. v. 18.) "God reconcil
ing us to himself through Jesus
Christ," or "God in Christ re
conciling the world to himself"
(2 Cor. v. 19.), are the modes of
expression in Scripture used to
describe the work of redemption.
God is unchangeable ; it is we
who are reconciled to Him, not
He to us. (Compare the use of
KaraXXaaffeaOai, applied to the
woman who is reconciled to her
husband in 1 Cor. vii. 11.) But,
on the other hand, the first spring
and motive of redemption comes
not from ourselves but from
Him.
Much stress, it is true, cannot
be laid on the precise use of
language ; for the Apostle might
have spoken in a figure of God
being angry with us and of us
as hated by Him. And this may
seem to be implied in the word
XP in the present passage.
But the comparison of Coloss. i.
21. : a.7rr)\\OTpt(*)pevovQ KCU e-^dpovg
TTJ c)tavotct . . . 7rapa.ffTijffai, shows
that ex,QpovQ may have an active,
as well as passive meaning.
fiia TOV Savarov . . . ev rrj fay- ]
Here, again, as at iv. 24., the
state of the Christian parts
asunder into two heads, corre
sponding to the death and life of
Christ. There it was said, " He
died for our sins arid rose again
for our justification." Here the
partition of Christian life is
somewhat different, " We were
reconciled by his death and shall
be saved by his life." It is un
necessary to suppose that the
Apostle meant further to say, "If
he was mighty in his death much
more will he be so in his life."
11. OV JJiOI OV C, CtAAci KCll KUV^tjJ-
juej ot, and not only so, but we also
joy-] One way of taking these
words is to supply ka^iv : or
KavyunEvoi may be regarded as a
more advanced stage of mmAAa-
yivTEQ, "we shall be saved, not
only reconciled but rejoicing."
These explanations save the gram
mar at the expense of the sense.
170 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. [Cn. V.
Sid rov Kvpiov rjiJitov I^crov ^jpicrrov, SL ov vvv TTJV
A \ * V OV /) ee ^ V
Aia TOVTO wcnrep OL e^os avuptoirov rj a/xapria ets TOV 12
For the Apostle s meaning is, " not
only shall we be saved, but we
shall rejoice in our salvation."
An exactly similar failure of con
struction occurs in 2 Cor* viii.
18, 19. : avvETTE^u^ev IE per
avrov 70> dfieX^ov, ov 6 KTTCUVOC
kv TV EvayyeXia) $ia iraffOov 7u)v
eKK\rj(Tiu)V ov jUoVov ^e, aXXa fcai
VTTO rStv
, where no verb
follows. Compare also 2 Cor. v.
12. ; in neither place can the pre
ceding verb be appropriately re
peated.
For the thought comp. ver. 3.,
of which it is an echo, ov povov
<), aXXct Kal Kav^wpeOa kv role
$Xi\f/ffiv. rr\v KaraXXay//v, re
ferring to fcaraXXayeVrfe, in ver.
11. vvv, opposed to the future
12 21. As a preface to the
following passage, every verse and
almost every particle of which
bears the traces of theological
warfare in the pages of commenta
tors, it will be convenient to state
very briefly the chief points in dis
pute in the Pelagian controversy.
Other controversies, it may be
truly said, pass away with the age
that gave birth to them. This, as
involving the first question of the
relation of God to man, must in
some form or other last as long
as the world itself.
The hinge of the Pelagian con
troversy is the free agency of
man. Is human nature, of itself,
capable of refusing evil and choos
ing good ? Can the will, by its
unaided power, accept and appro
priate the work of salvation? Ke-
specting what God and Christ
have done for man, there is, be
tween Pelagian and Augustinian,
Protestant and Catholic, no dif
ference of opinion. The question
is, at what point man himself is
to be introduced as a party : whe
ther, in the chain let down from
heaven to earth, he is a separate
link, or whether, to continue the
same figure, he is not a link in
the chain at all, but a weight
attached to it, ever sinking to
wards his native element.
Pelagius would have said that
man was free, independent, iso
lated, needing nothing for his
salvation but his own free will
and better mind, requiring nei
ther grace preventive nor grace
co-operative, but relying on him
self for acceptance with God,
according to the terms of the
Gospel.
The Calvinist, on the other
hand, consistently denies the free
agency of man. Grace is with
him the beginning, middle, and
end of the work of salvation. Man
is as far as possible gone from
original righteousness, without
power even to lay hold on the gift
of God.
Two modifications of these
views may be further mentioned:
(1.) The view according to
which human nature is not re
garded as absolutely and neces
sarily evil ; but yet, even in the
state of childhood and innocency,
as guilty before God because of
the sin of Adam, which is im
puted to it. This imputation of
the sin of Adam, the Protestant
VDK. 12.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
171
only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus
Christ, by whom we have now received the reconciliation.*
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world,
theologian considers as done away
by the imputation of the merits
of Christ, which are apprehend
ed and appropriated by faith,
while, according to Catholic theo
logians, it is purged away, with
the other consequences of original
sin, by the waters of baptism.
(2.) Another view, while agree
ing with the former in maintain
ing the partial corruption of
human nature, denies the doctrine
of imputation. Human nature
is sinful : this we know as a fact,
nor can we imagine how it could
be otherwise. But the fact which
we feel to be deep-seated within
us we have no sufficient reason
to connect with any single act of
an individual man.
It is between these two last-
mentioned views of doctrine that
the interpretations of this portion
of the Epistle to the Romans
chiefly oscillate ; the main point
of difference being whether the
sin and the righteousness spoken
of as flowing from the person of
Adam and of Christ, are to be
regarded as imputed or inherent.
When the Apostle said " Death
came upon all men for that all
sinned," did he mean sinned in
Adam or sinned in themselves ?
When he spoke of those "who did
not sin after the similitude of
Adam s transgression," does he
mean who did not, like Adam,
violate an express command, or
who were unlike Adam, in not
committing actual sin ?
Prior to the inquiry, which of
these two modes of interpretation
is the true one, is another, "Were
either of them in the Apostle s
mind ? " Did he not conceive the
subject in a more general way,
in which the distinctions of Cal-
vinist and Arminian, Pelagian
and Catholic, were not yet drawn
out ? The threads of later con
troversy are too fine for the Apo
stolical age; theybelong to another
stage of human thought and cul
ture. To entangle ourselves with
them in the interpretation of
Scripture can never help us to
enter into the true meaning
of the Apostle, the living ele
ments of whose thoughts can
only be traced in the writings of
himself and his contemporaries.
12. Atd rovro.~] The principal
meaning of this latter portion of
the chapter may be summed up
in the words of 1 Cor. xv. 22.,
" As in Adam all die, even so in
Christ shall all be made alive."
The latter clause, however, is not
regularly expressed. After the
words, " As by one man sin en
tered into the world," we expect
that there will follow, " even so
by one man righteousness entered
into the world." Instead, how
ever, of this regular parallel
ism between Adam and Christ,
the Apostle, in the 13th verse,
turns aside to answer a difficulty
arising from his previous state
ment, that "where there is no law
there is no transgression ;" and,
while stopping to meet the sup
posed inconsistency, loses sight
of the construction required by
the preceding sentence.
Various expedients have been
proposed for completing the con-
172
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. [Cn. V.
elo-rj\0v, Kal Sid rrjs d^apria^ 6 6dvaTo<$ y Kal
15 Trdvras dvOpMTrovs 6 6dvaro$ SirjXOev, <^ oj
d^jpi yap Popov dpapTia rjv iv Kocrp,oj, 13
struction : First, The device of
a parenthesis extending from
ver. 13. to ver. 18. : the last expe
dient which should be resorted
to in a writer so irregular in his
syntax as the Apostle. Secondly,
The missing apodosis has been
sought for in ver. 12. itself, either
in the words c)ta rr\c, aynapr/ag 6
^ai aroc, or in the clause which
follows, either :
" As by one man sin entered
into the world ; "
" Death also came by sin : "
or,
" As by one man sin entered
into the world, and death by
sin ; "
" Even so death came upon all
men."
Both these explanations, how
ever, do violence to the language
in the meaning which they give
to Kal KOI ovrwc, and are also
inconsistentwith thegeneral drift
of the passage, which is not to
show that " as sin came into the
world," death followed in its
train, but that " as in Adam all
died, even so in Christ shall all
be made alive."
If, disregarding the grammar,
we look only to the sense, the
missing apodosis is easily sup
plied both from what has pre
ceded, and from what follows :
"Therefore we receive reconci
liation by Jesus Christ, as by
one man sin entered into the
world." Comp. Si ov and Si li dc
avdpwTrov, in the llth and 12th
verses. It is further hinted at
in the words o c iortv TVTTOQ rov
at the end of the 14th
verse ; it is indirectly supplied
in ver. 15. and involved in the
whole remainder of the chap
ter.
Admitting the irregularity of
the construction, let us dismiss the
grammar to follow the thought.
The Apostle is about to speak of
Adam, the type of sin, as Christ
is the type of righteousness. The
sin of Adam is the sin of man,
as the righteousness of Christ is
the righteousness of man. But
how is the fact of sin reconcile-
able with the previous statements
of the Apostle : " Where there
is no law there is no transgres
sion"? Such is the doubt which
seems to cross the Apostle s
mind, which he answers ; first,
by saying, that there " was sin in
the world before the giving of
the law " (though he had said be
fore, "where there is no law there
is no transgression"), and then, as
if aware of his apparent inconsis
tency, he softens his former ex
pression into " sin is not im
puted where there is no law."
An- indirect answer is also sup
plied by the verse that follows :
" Howbeit death reigned from
Adam to Moses," i. e. men died
before the time of Moses, and
therefore they must have sinned.
The difficulty of this as of some
other passages (Rom. iii. 1 8.,
ix. 19 23.) arises out of the con
flict of opposite thoughts in the
Apostle s mind. Suppose him to
have said, " As by one man sin
entered into the world and death
by sin (for this is possible
though there was no law when
VER. 13.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
173
and death by sin ; and so death passed upon all men, for
is that all have sinned * for until the law sin was in the
I said, ov $e OVK tan vopng ovde
Trojoa/Bao-ic, I only meant that
sin is not imputed, but that it
exists is proved by the fact of
death reigning over all before
the time of Moses). But long
before we have arrived at this
point the thread of the main sen
tence has been lost. The Apostle
makes an attempt to recover it in
the words OQ tan TVTTOQ TOV pek-
XOVTOQ, and more regularly repeats
the parallel in ver. 15. 17.
fj apapTia elfffjXde.^ Comp. Gal.
iii. 23. : TTQO TOV fie IXdelv TIIV
7riffTty, for a similar personifica
tion. In Rom. vii. 9.: >/ dpap-
In 2 Cor. xi. 3.
the Apostle speaks of Eve being
deceived by the serpent. An
inconsistency is alleged between
these words, and still more be
tween 1 Timothy ii. 14. (" And
Adam was not deceived, but the
woman, being deceived, trans
gressed,") and the present passage.
It is hardly worth while meeting
the supposed inconsistency with
the answer that the Jews reck
oned their genealogies by men,
or that the female sex was so
looked down upon in ancient
times as to be thought unworthy
to bring sin into the world. It
was natural for the Apostle to
oppose Adam and Christ, but not
Eve and Christ.
a/mjrm a,] neither original sin
nor actual, nor the guilt of sin
as distinguished from sin itself
(for such differences had no ex
istence in the Apostle s age), nor,
like a/iajorr/jua, confined to the act
of sin. Though not absolutely
excluding this last meaning ; as
its plural use shows, a/japria de
scribes sin rather as a mental
state or in relation to the mind
(compare aoiKia, a/o?^a). It is
often the power of sin, or sin col
lectively, sometimes, as here, the
personification of it.
Kal %ia Tijg apapTictQ o Savaroc,
and death by sin. ] The Apostle
plainly states that " Sin brought
death into the world ; " but what
death, spiritual or physical, or
whether he has always distin
guished the two, is a question not
so easily determined.
That the sin of Adam was
the cause of the death of Adam
was the common belief of the
Jews in St. Paul s time. The
oldest trace of this belief is found
in the Book of Wisdom, ii. 24. :
" For God created man without
corruption, and made him after
the image of his own likeness.
Nevertheless, through envy of the
devil, came death into the world,
and they that hold of his side
prove it." The death of Adam,
and of all mankind in him, is
again referred to by the Apostle
in 1 Cor. xv. 21. ; respecting
which latter passage two things
are observable : first, that the
Apostle makes no allusion to the
sin of Adam as the cause of his
death rather this is a conse
quence of his and of other men s
earthly nature, 1 Cor. xv. 48. 0. ;
and, secondly, that the death
spoken of is plainly, from the
contrast, not spiritual, but phy
sical.
And such it is commonly sup
posed to be in the present passage.
Such an interpretation is clear
and definite, and one with which
most readers will be satisfied.
174
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. V.
ia Se OVK eXXoyetrai fir] 6Wo? vopov, aXX IpacriXevcrev u
0,770
Yet it may be doubted whether,
from the mere difference of modes
of thought in his time and our
OAvn, we do not give it a greater
degree of definiteness than it
possessed to the Apostle himself.
To us sin and death have no
natural connexion. So far as
they are united, we regard them
as united by an act of God. But
the Apostle joins them together
in the same way that we might
join together disease and death,
or life and health. The flesh and
the body are to him the natural
seats both of physical and moral
corruption.
It must be allowed that in
other passages St. Paul as dis
tinctly speaks of death for spiri
tual death, as he is here supposed
to do for physical death. Com
pare vii. 9, 10. " Sin revived,
and I died ; " andver. 13. "Was
it then that which was good that
became death unto me." In other
passages, again, Savaroc has an
equally distinct meaning of spi
ritual and physical death at once.
For example, in Rom. vi. 21., the
word appears, at first sight, to
refer only to spiritual evil; but the
parallel of eternal life in the next
clause, shows that physical death
is not excluded. In like manner
it may be fairly argued that St.
Paul does not connect sin and
death in this chapter in any other
sense than he connects life and
righteousness. But as he could
not have meant that the continu
ance of existence after death de
pended on the righteousness of
Christ, so neither can he mean
that temporal death depended on
Adam s sin.
Nor can it be left out of sight
that in the 15th chapter of the
1 Cor. the Apostle makes no refer
ence to a prior state of innocence
from which Adam fell. " The first
man is of the earth, earthy : the
second man is the Lord from
heaven. As is the earthy so are
they that are earthy ; as is the
heavenly so are they also that
are heavenly." Adam and Christ
are here contrasted, not in refer
ence to any act performed by
Adam, but to their own nature.
It would surely be an error to lay
stress on the precise points of
view taken by the Apostle in this
chapter, considering that a differ
ent view occurs in the parallel
These considerations lead us
to doubt how far St. Paul dis
tinctly recognised the interpreta
tions which later ages have given
to his words. Could the conse
quences which have been drawn
from them have been present to
his mind, he might have told us
that "these things are an alle
gory," like the bondwoman and
the freewoman, or the baptism of
the Fathers unto Moses in the
cloud and in the sea.
The two clauses that follow are
parallel to the two preceding ones,
though the order is inverted :
"As by one man sin entered
into the world, and death by sin,"
" And in like manner, as all
men sinned, so all men died."
tq? &j Trarrec ilijapTor, because
all have sinned. ] Does this
mean that all men sinned in
Adam s sin ? (Compare ver. 19.,
c)ia rrJQ TrapaKorjg rov I roe avdpw-
TTOU cijjLapTioXoi. KaTEffTaOyjarav ol
VER. 14.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
175
world : but sin is not imputed where there is no law.
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even
TroXXoi), in the same way that
" Levi paid tithes in Abraham ; "
and as it is said in 2 Cor. v.
15., " If one died for all then all
died ; " or that death was the
penalty of actual sin, as in the
case of Adam, so of all mankind.
The last way of taking the pas
sage gives the most point to the
following verse. For if St. Paul
had been speaking of "sinning
in Adam," it would have been
hardly necessary to guard against
the inconsistency of sinning with
out law ; and throughout the
epistle he has spoken not of im
puted, but of actual sin. Com
pare iii. 9. 23. <p M has been
translated " under the idea that,"
a meaning of the words, which
somewhat softens the harshness
of the first of the interpretations
given above, " All men died
under the idea that all sinned in
Adam." This explanation is in
sufficiently confirmed by the pas
sages adduced in support, such
as 2 Cor. v. 4. ; Phil. iii. 12.
Again we must ask, had so subtle
a difference any existence in the
mind of the Apostle ?
13. axi 04 7**p vojuov, for until
the lawJ\ But sin is inseparable
from the law, as has been re
peated above, "where there is
no law there is no transgression."
How was it, then, that in the in
terval between Adam and Moses
men could have sinned? We
answer this difficulty by chang
ing the form of our expression
without materially altering its
meaning ; not, " where there is
no law there is no transgression,"
but, " sin is not imputed where
there is no law." Sin, in other
words, was not exceeding sinful ;
it did not abound or show itself
in its true nature, yet it existed
still. Comp. ver. 20.
It is true in the abstract to say
that, without knowledge or con
sciousness there is no transgres
sion ; or, in other words, that an
irrational being is incapable of
sin ; but, in proportion as the idea
of rojuioQ is narrowed to the Jew
ish law or even the commandment
of God in general, the statement
must be qualified.
The words a^apTia e OVK cXXo-
yelrai yur) ovrog vo^ov are con
nected both with what follows
and what precedes. On the one
hand, they are the answer to the
objection, that without law there
could be no sin. On the other
hand, the adversative aXXa, in the
next verse, implies that they are
opposed to what follows, " sin is
not imputed where there is no
law ; but [that it really exists is
proved by the fact that] death
reigned from Adam to Moses."
Or the three clauses together may
be connected as follows : " I say
all men died because all men sin
ned. For there was sin before
the law, but unimputed. But
this non-imputation of sin is no
proof of its non-existence. As
there was death during the in
terval, there was also sin." Or,
once more, the argument may be
expressed in the form of a syllo
gism as follows :
v. 1. All who died sinned.
But those to whom sin
is not imputed died.
. . They sinned.
176
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
[CH. V.
OS (TTW TV7T05 TOV
to? TO TTapOLTTTaJfJia 15
el yap ra> TOV ^09
Tov
ITTL TO) 6//,oiajjuaTi rrjs trapafido-eus
XoVTOS. aXX
Ka TO ^dpLcrfJi
01 TroXXoi aireOavov, T
So)ped iv yapiTi Trj TOV epos dvOpuTrov I^crou -\picrTOv ets
vs TroXXou? 7TpLcro-Vo-ev. Kal ov^ a)? Si ej os afJLapTrj- ir,
TO Suprjfjia TO [JLCV yap Kplpa ef e^os et? /cara-
TO Se ^aptcTjita CK: 7ro\\cov TrapaTTTcojjLaTOJV ets
a. ei yap [ez^ 1 rw] ez4 7rapa7TTa>p,aTL 6 Oavaros ir
1 Om. eV.
For similar instances of ambi
guous clauses, comp. Gal. ii. 4.,
Kom. iii. 3.
For the general meaning of
the passage, comp. Acts xvii. 30. :
" The times of that ignorance
God winked at." Rom. iii. 25. :
(Hia TIJV TTupeffiv rwv TrpoytyovoTWV
a/j.aprr)fj,a.Tit)V. John, XV. 22. : If
I had not come and spoken to
them they had not had sin."
cixpt is used in its ordinary sense
of duration of time up to a point,
"until," "up to the time of."
Yet the expression is inaccurate,
because the point of time here
mentioned, the giving of the law,
is not the limit of the continu
ance of sin. That the idea of
" after " cannot be excluded is
also shown by plxpiQ, in the next
verse, in the use of which there is
a similar inaccuracy.
14. ITTI JJLYJ rove OjuapT-j/o-avT-ae,
over them that had not sinned,~\ is
commonly interpreted, according
as what may be termed the Augus-
tinian or Pelagian view of the pas
sage is preferred, either, who did
not commit actual sin like Adam,
but only inherited Adam s im
puted sin ; or, who did commit
actual sin, but not like Adam
against a positive law or com
mandment.
A third way of explaining the
words, though it necessitates what
may be termed the Augustinian
interpretation, is worthy of atten
tion. ?ri TV ojuoiw^uun may be
connected with i&affi\ev(m>, as
a further explanation of eVi rove
prj ajjiapTriffarrag. "But death
reigned from Adam to Moses
upon those who had not sinned,
because of the likeness of the sin
of Adam" the "likeness" only,
if, where no law is, there is no
direct imputation of sin. Comp.
ch. vi. 5.: el ycip ffvjj,(j)VToi
ru> ojuotw/zan TOV
avrov, aXXa KOI TTJQ ava-
iaropeda. All men are
thus identified with the sin of
Adam, as they are to be identi
fied with the righteousness of Plim
that was to come. Better than
any of these subtle modes it is to
take the passage in a more gene
ral sense : " But death reigned
from Adam to Moses even upon
those who had not sinned ex
pressly and consciously, to whom
sin therefore could not be im
puted in the same sense as it was
to Adam." Compare verse 13.
VER. 1517.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
177
over them that had not sinned after the similitude of
Adam s transgression, who is the figure of him that was
is to come. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift.
For if through the offence of one many died *, much
more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is
by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift :
for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the
17 free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if
by one* offence death reigned through* one; much more
OQ tCTlV 7V7TOC,] wllO IS the figUFG
or image of the second Adam ; or
of whom Christ is the antitype.
Compare for the use of TVTTOC, Acts,
vii. 44.: /caret TOV TVTTOV oV ewpd/cet,
and the corresponding word av-
Tirvrrog, which occurs in 1 Pet. iii.
21. : u
(3a7rriffp.a.
15. "But the case is different
with the offence and with the
free gift." These words are
the theme of what follows in the
four next verses.
The common antithesis in
St. Paul s Epistles is between
the law and the promise, faith
and works. Here the same oppo
sition is stated more objectively
and universally between Adam
and Christ. The law is for the
present lost sight of in the more
general point of view now taken.
of Ti-oAXo/, not many as opposed
to all, but a number of men as
opposed to one.
TroXXw juaXXoy, muck more. ] If
God is just, much more is he
merciful. Comp. above ver. 10.:
" If while we were enemies we
were reconciled, much more being
reconciled shall we be saved."
xi 24. : If the Gentile is grafted
on the good olive, how much
VOL. II, N
more the Jew on the olive that
is his own.
?/ %api Kal i] $wpco, the grace
of God and the gift which goes
with it. eTrepiffan ffev : abounded
unto many, or abounded in that
it came to many.
16. The Apostle goes on to
show that the balance is yet
further on the side of mercy. He
has already said that many died
through the act of one man, and
much more that the grace of God
by one man abounded unto many.
He has now to contrast the effect
of the offence and the effect of
the free gift condemnation in
the one case, justification in the
other. He also draws out fur
ther the opposition of the one
and many. One man s offence
brought condemnation on many,
but many offences return to one
act of pardon. From one to many,
from many to one, is the reckon
ing of the justice and mercy of
God.
17. is a heightening of v. 15. :
"If by the offence of one man
many died, if by one offence
death reigned much more shall
grace abound unto many much
more shall they, which partake
of grace, reign in life through
178 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. [On. V.
/3acri\V(TV Sia rov o ds, TroXXe? jjia\\ov ol ryv Trepicroreiav
TTjs xapiros /cat [7179 Scopeas] r^s St/catocrw^s Xafi/3dVoz Tes
ez> a>?7 ySacriXevcroucrt^ Sia roO e^os Irjcrov xpicrrou. apa is
>s Si* e>o9 TrapaTTTtojJiaTOS eis TrdVrag av9p(*movs eis
a, OVTCOS Acal Si ews StKatw/^aros eis TrdVras az/-
ets St/caiwcrt^ 0)775 oxrTrep yap Sia r^s Trapa- 19
/co^s rov ews avOpomov a^aprajKol KarecrrdO^crav ol TroXXot,
OVTWS /cat Sta Ti75 VTra/corJs TOU ez^os St/catoi /caracrra-
OrjcrovTai, ol TroXXoi. ^d/x,os 8e Trapetcr^X^e^, iVa TrXeo^acr^ 20
TO TrapaTTTco/x-a oS 8e IrrXeovacrev fj apapTia, vTrepeTreptcr- 21
crevcrev rj ^apis, ^ a vcnrep eySacrtXeucre^ 07 d/x-apria e^ r<y
KOLL TI ^apts /Bacrikevcrrj 8ia SIKCUO 0-1^779 eis
Sia I^crov ^ptcrrov roC Kvpiov r
one." Compare, for a similar 20. From the more universal
repetition, ch. vii. 16, 17. 19, point of view the Apostle re-
20. turns to the more particular. He
18. fte t)iKcuw<nv w>jfe, to ,/ws- repeats what he had before
tification of life. ] Compare Jw)v touched upon at ver. 13. It was
alwviov, below, and W; and imi- not that there was, strictly speak-
ocrvvr), in the previous verse. Out ing, no sin where there was no
of the two latter the expression is law ; there was sin, but it was
constructed, in accordance with not imputed. Now, the law-came
that analogy by which St. Paul in that the offence might abound ;
speaks of justification as a resur- or, as we might express it, that
rection with Christ (ch. vi. 4 men might awaken to their real
8.). The whole verse may be re- state. The same thought is ex-
garded as a repetition of v. 16., pressed in Gal. iii. 19. "Where-
into which a new thought has fore then serveth the law?" it
found its way from the words iv was added because of transgres-
w?? fiaffiXevffo uffir, which have sions : and below, Rom. vii. 13.
preceded ; it also contains a sum- " Sin, that it might appear sin,
ming up of the whole argument. working death unto me through
VEU. 1821.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
179
they which receive the* abundance of grace and of the gift
of righteousness shall reign in life through * one, Jesus
18 Christ. Therefore as by one* offence judgment came
upon all rnen to condemnation ; even so by one act of
righteousness the free gift came upon all men unto justi-
19 fication of life. For as by one man s disobedience man}-
were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall
20 many be made righteous. But * the law came in be
sides, that the offence might abound. But where sin
21 abounded, grace did much more abound : that as sin *
reigned in* death, even so might grace reign through
righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
that which is good, that sin might
become exceeding sinful."
ov SE 7rAoVao > .] But here,
too, mercy overbalanced justice.
21. There was yet, however,
a higher purpose for which the
law came in, as the other half of
a scheme of mercy, in which the
reign of sin and evil was first to
be made manifest, that the reign
of grace and righteousness might
also begin.
The leading thought of the
preceding section has been, " As
in Adam all die, even so in
Christ shall all be made alive."
But there is a great difference
between the act of sin and the
act of justification. If many
died through the first, much more
shall they be redeemed by the
second ; if there was one offence
to condemn, there are many
offences to be forgiven : where
death and condemnation are,much
more there are life and grace ; as
one comes to all men through
one, so likewise the other. The
five verses from 15 19. consist
almost wholly of -a repetition of
the same thought, in the form
either of a parallel between the
act of Adam and of Christ, or of
a climax in which the grace of
Christ is contrasted in its effects
with Adam s sin. The law came
to increase the sum of trans
gressions, but grace still exceeded.
The law came in with this very
object, that as sin had triumphed,
grace might triumph also.
N 2
180 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
ON THE IMPUTATION OF THE SIN OF ADAM.
THAT so many opposite systems of Theology seek their authority in
Scripture is a fair proof that Scripture is different from them all.
That is to say, Scripture often contains in germ, what is capable of
being drawn to either side; it is indistinct, where they are distinct ;
it presents two lights, where they present only one ; it speaks in
wardly, while they clothe themselves in the forms of human know
ledge. That indistinct, intermediate, inward point of view at which
the truth exists but in germ, they have on both sides tended to ex
tinguish and suppress. Passing allusions, figures of speech, rhetorical
oppositions, have been made the foundation of doctrinal statements,
which are like a part of the human mind itself, and seem as if they
could never be uprooted, without uprooting the very sentiment of
religion. Systems of this kind exercise a constraining power, which
makes it difficult for us to see anything in Scripture but themselves.
For example, how slender is the foundation in the New Testament
for the doctrine of Adam s sin being imputed to his posterity two
passages in St. Paul at most, and these of uncertain interpretation.
The little cloud, no bigger than a man s hand, has covered the
heavens. To reduce such subjects to their proper proportions, we
should consider : First, what space they occupy in Scripture ; Se
condly, how far the language used respecting them is literal or figu
rative ; Thirdly, whether they agree with the more general truths of
Scripture and our moral sense, or are not " rather repugnant there
to ; " Fourthly, whether their origin may not be prior to Christianity, or
traceable in the after history of the Church ; Fifthly, whether the words
of Scripture may not be confused with logical inferences which are
IMPUTATION OF THE SIN OF ADAM. 181
appended to them ; Sixthly, in the case of this and of some other
doctrines, whether even poetry has not lent its aid to stamp them in
our minds in a more definite and therefore different form from that
in which the Apostles taught them ; Lastly, how far in our own day
they are anything more than words.
The two passages alluded to are Rom. v. 12 21., 1 Corinthians,
xv. 21 ? 22. 45 49., in both of which parallels are drawn between
Adam and Christ. In both the sin of Adam is spoken of, or seems to
be spoken of, as the source of death to man : " As by one man s trans
gression sin entered into the world, and death by sin," and " As in
Adam all die." Such words appear plain at first sight ; that is to say,
we find in them what we bring to them : let us see what considera
tions modify their meaning. If we accept the Pelagian view of the
passage, which refers the death of each man to actual sin, there is an
end of the controversy. But it does not equally follow that, if what
is termed the received interpretation is given to the words, the
doctrine which it has been attempted to ground upon them would
have any real foundation.
We will suppose, then, that no reference is contained in either pas
sage to "actual sin." In some other sense than this mankind are
identified with Adam s transgression. But the question still remains,
whether Adam s sin and death are merely the type of the sin and
death of his posterity, or, more than this, the cause. The first expla
nation quite satisfies the meaning of the words " As in Adam all die ;"
the second seems to be required by the parallel passage in the Romans :
" As by one man sin came into the world," and " As by one man many
were made sinners," if taken literally.
The question involves the more general one, whether the use of
language by St. Paul makes it necessary that we should take his
words literally in this passage. Is he speaking of Adam s sin being the
cause of sin and death to his posterity, in any other sense than he
spoke of Abraham being a father of circumcision to the uncircumcised?
(chap, iv.) Yet no one has ever thought of basing a doctrine on
these words. Or is he speaking of all men dying in Adam, in any
N 3
182 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
other sense than he says in 2 Cor. v. 15., that if one died for all, then
all died. Yet in this latter passage, while Christ died literally, it
was only in a figure that all died. May he be arguing in the same
way as when he infers from the word " seed " being used in the sin
gular, that " thy seed is Christ " ? Or, if we confine ourselves to the
passage under consideration : Is the righteousness of Christ there
imputed to believers, independently of their own inward holiness ?
and if so, should the sin of Adam be imputed independently of the
actual sins of men ?
I. A very slight difference in the mode of expression would make
it impossible for us to attribute to St. Paul the doctrine of the
imputation of the sin of Adam. But we have seen before how varied,
and how different from our own, are his modes of thought and
language. Compare i. 4., iv. 25. To him, it was but a slight trans
ition, from the identification of Adam with the sins of all mankind,
to the representation of the sin of Adam as the cause of those sins.
To us, there is the greatest difference between the two statements.
To him, it was one among many figures of the same kind, to oppose
the first and second Adam, as elsewhere he opposes the old and new
man. With us, this figure has been singled out to be made the
foundation of a most exact statement of doctrine. We do not remark
that there is not even the appearance of attributing Adam s sin to
his posterity, in any part of the Apostle s writings in which he is not
drawing a parallel between Adam and Christ.
II. The Apostle is not speaking of Adam as fallen from a state of
innocence. He could scarcely have said, " The first man is of the
earth, earthy," if he had had in his mind that Adam had previously
existed in a pure and perfect state. He is only drawing a parallel
between Adam and Christ. The moment we leave this parallel, all
is uncertain and undetermined. What was the nature of that
innocent life ? or of the act of Adam which forfeited it ? and how
was the effect of that act communicated to his posterity ? The minds
of men in different ages of the world have strayed into these and
similar inquiries. Difficulties about " fate, predestination, and free-
IMPUTATION OF THE SIN OF ADAM. 183
will " (not food for angels thoughts), cross our path in the garden
of Eden itself. But neither the Old or New Testament give any
answer to them. Imagination has possessed itself of the vacant spot,
and been busy, as it often is, in proportion to the slenderness of
knowledge.
III. There are other elements of St. Paul s teaching, which are
either inconsistent with the imputation of Adam s sin to his posterity,
or at any rate are so prominent as to make such a doctrine if held
by him comparatively unimportant. According to St. Paul, it is not
the act of Adam, but the law that
" Brought sin into the world and all our woe."
And the law is almost equivalent to "the knowledge of sin." But
original sin is, or may be, wholly unconscious the fault of nature in
the infant equally with the man. Not so the sin of which St. Paul
speaks, which is inseparable from consciousness, as he says himself:
" I was alive without the law once," that is, before I came to the
consciousness of sin.
IV. It will be admitted that we ought to feel still greater re
luctance to press the statement of the Apostle to its strict logical
consequences, if we find that the language which he here uses is that
of his age and country. From the circumstance of our first reading
the doctrine of the imputation of Adam s sin to his posterity in the
Epistles of St. Paul, we can hardly persuade ourselves that this is not
its original source. The incidental manner in which it is alluded to,
might indeed lead us to suppose that it would scarcely have been
intelligible, had it not been also an opinion of his time. But if this
inference should seem doubtful, there is direct evidence to show that
the Jews connected sin and death, and the sins and death of man
kind, with the sin of Adam, in the same way as the Apostle. The
earliest trace of such a doctrine is found in the apocryphal Book
of Wisdom, ii. 24. : " But God created man to be immortal, and made
him to be an image of his own eternity. Nevertheless, through envy
of the devil came death into the world ; and they that do hold of
N 4
184 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
his side do find it." And Eccles. xxv. 24. : " Of the woman came the
beginning of sin, and through her we all die." It was a further re
finement of some of their teachers, that when Adam sinned the whole
world sinned ; because, at that time, Adam was the whole world, or
because the soul of Adam comprehended the souls of all, so that
Adam s sin conveyed a hereditary taint to his posterity. It was a
confusion of a half physical, half logical or metaphysical notion,
arising in the minds of men who had not yet learnt the lesson of our
Saviour "That which is from without defileth not a man."
That human nature or philosophy sometimes rose up against such
inventions is certainly true ; but it seems to be on the whole ad
mitted, that the doctrine of Augustin is in substance generally
agreed to by the Kabbis, and that there is no trace of their having
derived it from the writings of St. Paul. Compare the passages
quoted in Fritzsche, vol. i. pp. 293 296. and Schoettgen.
But not only is the connexion of sin and death with each other,
and with the sin of Adam, found in the Rabbinical writings ; the
type and antitype of the first and second Adam are also contained
in them. In reading the first chapters of Genesis, the Jews made
a distinction between the higher Adam, who was the light of the
world, and had control over all things, who was mystically referred
to where it is said, they two shall be one flesh ; and the inferior
Adam, who was Lord only of the creation ; who had " the breath
of life," but not "the living soul." Schoettgen, i. 512514.,
670 673. By some, indeed, the latter seems to have been iden
tified with the Messiah. By Philo, on the other hand, the Xoyog is
identified with the irp&roQ Aaju, who is without sex, while the
ayflpwTroe x ^e is created afterwards by the help of the angels.
De Great. Mund. p. 30. It is not the object of this statement to
reconcile these variations, but merely to indicate, first, that the idea
of a first and second Adam was familiar to the Jews in the time of
St. Paul, and that one or other of them was regarded by them as the
Word and the Messiah.
V. A slighter, though not less real foundation of the doctrine has
IMPUTATION OF THE SIN OF ADAM. 185
been what may be termed the logical symmetry of the imputation of
the righteousness of Christ and of the sin of Adam. The latter half
is the correlative of the former ; they mutually support each other.
We place the first and second Adam in juxtaposition, and seem to
see a fitness or reason in the one standing in the same relation to the
fallen as the other to the saved.
VI. It is hardly necessary to ask the further question, what mean
ing we can attach to the imputation of sin and guilt which are not our
own, and of which we are unconscious. God can never see us other
than we really are, or judge us without reference to all our circum
stances and antecedents. If we can hardly suppose that He would
allow a fiction of mercy to be interposed between ourselves and Him,
still less can we imagine that He would interpose a fiction of ven
geance. If He requires holiness before He will save, much more, may
we say in the Apostle s form of speech, will He require sin before He
dooms us to perdition. Nor can anything be in spirit more contrary
to the living consciousness of sin of which the Apostle everywhere
speaks, than the conception of sin as dead unconscious evil, originating
in the act of an individual man, in the world before the flood.
VII. A small part of the train of consequences which have been
drawn out by divines can be made to hang even upon the letter of
the Apostle s words, though we should not take into account the
general temper and spirit of his writings. Logical inferences often
help to fill up the aching void in our knowledge of the Spiritual
world. They seem necessary ; in time they receive a new support
from habit and tradition. They hide away and conceal the nature
of the original premisses. They may be likened to the superstruc
ture of a building which the foundation has not strength to bear ;
or, rather, perhaps, when compared to the serious efforts of human
thought, to the plaything of the child who places one brick upon
another in wondering suspense, until the whole totters and falls, or
his childish fancy pleases itself with throwing it down. So, to apply
these remarks to our present subject, we are contented to repeat the
simple words of the Apostle, " As in Adam all die, even so in Christ
186 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
shall all be made alive." Perhaps we may not be able to recall all the
associations which they conveyed to his mind. But neither are we
willing to affirm his meaning to be that the sin of one man was the
cause of other men s sins, or that God condemned one part of the
human race for a fault not their own, because He was going to save
another part ; or that original sin, as some say, or the guilt of original
sin, as is the opinion of others, is washed away in baptism. There
is a terrible explicitness in such language touching the realities of a
future life which makes us shrink from trusting our own faculties
amid far-off deductions like these. We feel that we are undermining,
not strengthening, the foundations of the Gospel. We fear to take
upon ourselves a burden which neither " we nor our fathers are able
to bear." Instead of receiving such statements only to explain them
away, or keep them out of sight, it is better to answer boldly in the
words of the Apostle, "God forbid! for how shall God judge the
world."
On the whole, then, we are led to infer that in the Augustinian
interpretation of this passage, even if it agree with the letter of the
text, too little regard has been paid to the extent to which St. Paul
uses figurative language, and to the manner of his age in interpre
tations of the Old Testament. The difficulty of supposing him to be
allegorising the narrative of Genesis is slight, in comparison with the
difficulty of supposing him to countenance a doctrine at variance
with our first notions of the moral nature of God.
But when the figure is dropped, and allowance is made for the
manner of the age, the question once more returns upon us
" What is the Apostle s meaning ? " He is arguing, we see, KO.T
avdpwTToi , and taking his stand on the received opinions of his time.
Do we imagine that his object is no other than to set the seal of his
authority on these traditional beliefs? The whole analogy, not
merely of the writings of St. Paul, but of the entire New Testament,
would lead us to suppose that his object was not to reassert them,
but to teach, through them, a new and nobler lesson. The Jewish
Eabbis would have spoken of the first and second Adam ; but which
IMPUTATION OF THE SIN OF ADAM. 187
of them would have made the application of the figure to all man
kind ? Which of them would have breathed the quickening Spirit
into the dry bones ? The figure of the Apostle bears the impress of
his own age and country; the interpretation of the figure is for
every age, and for the whole world. A figure of speech it remains
still, an allegory after the manner of that age and country, but
yet with no uncertain or ambiguous signification. It means that
" God hath made of one blood all the nations of the earth ; " and
that "he hath concluded all under sin, that he may have mercy
upon all." It means a truth deep yet simple, the fact which we
recognise in ourselves and trace everywhere around us that we
are one in a common evil nature, which, if it be not derived from
the sin of Adam, exists as really as if it were. It means that we
shall be made one in Christ, by the grace of God, in a measure here?
more fully and perfectly in another world. It means that Christ is
the natural head of the human race, the author of its spiritual life.
It shows Him to us as he enters within the veil, in form as a man, the
"first fruits of them which sleep." It is a sign or intimation which
guides our thoughts in another direction also, beyond the world of
which religion speaks, to observe what science tells us of the interde
pendence of soul and body what history tells of the chain of
lives and events. It leads us to reflect on ourselves not as isolated^
independent beings ; not such as we appear to be to our own
narrow consciousness ; but as we truly are the creatures of ante
cedents which we can never know, fashioned by circumstances over
which we have no control. The infant, coming into existence in a
wonderful manner, inherits somethingj not from its parents only, but
from the first beginning of the human race. He too is born into a
family of which God in Christ is the Father. There is enough here
to meditate upon " a mystery since the world was " without the
" weak and beggarly " elements of Rabbinical lore. We may not
encumber St. Paul "with the things which he destroyed."
188 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
CHAP VI.
THERE are some errors in religion which are ever attendant on the
truths connected with them. Not only have men blessed with the
grace of God greater powers and responsibilities than others, but
they have also dangers, if not greater, yet peculiar to them, and
seeming from the very constitution of the human mind itself to be
inseparable from their religious state. There are faults, delusions,
prejudices, tendencies to evil, to which they are liable, and which
religion itself seems to foster in the weakness of human nature.
One of these tendencies is antinomianism, or the tendency to rest in
feeling, without knowledge or action. It is a corruption not pecu
liar to Christianity, but common to all religions which have had
anything of spiritual life or power ; in the case of individuals often
exercising a subtle influence among those who disavow it in words.
It already existed among the Jews in the time of St. Paul, as we
may gather from the Epistle of St. James, and are informed by
Philo. De Migr. Abrah. Man gey. i. 450.
Against this corruption the Apostle sets himself in the present
chapter. There was nothing more natural if grace abounded, than
that men should continue in sin, that it might yet more abound.
Experience sadly proves that there is a faith without works, hope
of forgiveness without repentance, final assurance without moral
goodness. There are religious states in which the eye of the soul
seems to lose its clear insight into right and truth, and even ob
scures with the consolations of the Gospel its sterner sense of the
holiness of God. In the hour of death especially, nature herself
seems to assist in the delusion. In the first ages, as in all other
times of religious excitement, such a delusion was more than ordi-
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 189
narily likely to prevail. It was a charge made against the Apostle
himself that he said : " Let us do evil that good may come." ;
At this point, therefore, in his great argument, when the abun
dance of Divine grace has been already developed, the Apostle pauses
to guard against the dangerous inference. His manner of doing so
is characteristic of his view of the doctrine itself. He does not seek
to test the Christian state by external acts, but to exalt our inward
notion of it. He does not say, a true faith is that which brings
forth good works, or that which is known like a tree by its fruits.
To him, the very idea of Christian life is death to sin, and death
with Christ. In the previous chapter no language seemed too strong
to express the fulness and freedom of the grace of God. That
might tempt us to continue in sin. But no, we are dead to sin.
The state of grace itself is a state of union with Christ, in which we
follow Him through the various stages of His life. When we think
of it as death, sin dies within us ; when we think of it as life, we are
risen with Him.
An analogy may be traced between this chapter and the com
mencement of chap, iii., which may be said to be directed against
Jewish, as this against Christian antinomianism. They both treat
of the same subject considered under different points of view, as the
error of the Jew, relying on the promises to Abraham and the non
interference of God with the evil from which he is himself exempt ;
secondly, as the error of the believer in Christ, whose soul is ab
sorbed in the thought of His grace, which he nevertheless regards,
like the Jew, as the imparting of an outward gift or privilege, not of
an inward spirit.
Besides this general parallelism with the third chapter, other
parallelisms occur also in the structure of the sixth chapter itself.
It is divided into two leading sections, which correspond to each
other, the text of the first of which is "We may not sin, because
we are dead to sin ; " of the second " We may not sin, because if
we do we shall become the servants of sin." In each of these sec
tions are several reduplications. The eighth verse answers to the
190 EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
fifth, the ninth to the sixth ; the tenth stands in the same rela
tion to the ninth as the seventh to the sixth ; the eleventh corre
sponds to the tenth, the fifteenth to the first ; the nineteenth is a
composition of the sixteenth and thirteenth. There is also a some
what less obvious connexion between the eighteenth and fourteenth
verses. In the earlier half of the chapter, verses three and four cor
respond respectively to the two members of verse two ; five is a fur
ther confirmation of three and four ; six and eight are confirmations
of five ; nine and eleven are a hortatory statement of verse five.
192
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[OH. VI.
Ti ovv epovjjiev ; cTTiplvtopev 1 rfj apapTia, Iva rj
; prj yeVotro. oiWes aTreOdvopev TTJ ctjua/ma, 2
zv avTrj ; rj dy^oeire on ocroi IpaTrTicrdrjiAev 3
v Irjcrovv, eis roz^ OdvaTOV avrov e
770)9 eri
etg
VI. 1. Tt ovv epov/jiev, What
shall we say, then ?] What shall
we say, then ? if this be the case
with the law, are we to continue
in sin that grace may abound ?
The connexion of the thought is
vith the whole previous chapter,
ind especially with ver. 20. If
" the law came in that the offence
might abound, and so grace yet
more abound," there might seem
to be a sort of " doing evil that
good may come " in the purposes
of Providence. The Apostle
shows that this law of " bringing
good out of evil " does not apply
to the lives of men. In chapter
iii. a similar suggestion had in
truded : "Why if my sin re
dounds to the glory of God, am I
still judged as a sinner ? " which
is suppressed as impious and im
moral. Here in the same way
the thought that the law was in
tended to increase sin, might lead
to the conclusion that what God
wanted was the increase of sin.
Sin as much as you can, yet God s
grace will still exceed. To which
the Apostle replies, " That be
far from us." The state of grace
into which we have passed, is a
state of death unto sin. How
can we still live in it ?
2. a7T0avojUV rrj apapriq. is
said like rj v rr\ a juctpT-m, from
which the form of the expression
is borrowed ; just as below, v.
20-, eXevOepoi rfj ^iKaLoavvy re
ceives its meaning from opposi
tion to fiovXouffdat. rrj
Compare Gal. ii. 20 V
vopa) diredavov iva. deaj i/<7w ; 1
Pet. ii. 24., iva. TCUQ dpaprtaig
aTroyevojuevot 0W ^rfff^jJLev. The
Apostle is speaking of the ge
neral state of Christians being
one of death to sin. The symbol
of this is baptism, as he explains
in the following verse.
3. 7) ayvoeirs ;] Know ye not
that as many of us as were baptized
into Christ, were baptized into
his death?
fluTrri^effOaL etc.] So the Is
raelites ele rov Muijffijv, 1 Cor.
x. 2. ; ttc a<p(Tiv afjapTitir, Mark
i. 4. : SO, tig 70 Iwavrov /3a7rriflrjua,
Acts xix. 3. ; fig TO ovopa IloyXov,
1 Cor. i. 13. ; elg TO OVOJJ.CL roi>
Harpoc;, /ecu rov Ytov, /ecu rov dyiov
HvEvparog, Matt, xxviii. 19.
Compare o^ivvvat etc lepoo-oXv/^a.
elg cannot be explained in these
passages as meaning "with the
thought of" or " looking to : " the
relation expressed is purely ob
jective, and not always the same.
etc TOV Mojvfffjv means " before
Moses," or " at the command of
Moses." In the words etc a</>e<nj>
a^ajortwv, etc signifies the result
or object ; so probably in elg TO
(3u7rri^(rdat
elg oro/jLa only differs in the mode
of thought from /3a7rrt e<T0cu iirl
ovopari, both meaning to be bap
tized " in the name of/ with a
VEB. 14.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
193
6 WHAT shall we say then ? Are we to l continue in
2 sin, that grace may abound ? God forbid. How shall
3 we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein ? Know
ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into 2 Christ
4 Jesus were baptized into his death ? Therefore we
Shall we.
2 Jesus Christ.
reference to the baptismal for
mula.
The expression in the text is
somewhat different from any of
these.
To be baptized into Christ is
to be baptized so as to be one
with Christ, or to become a mem
ber of Christ by baptism. Com
pare 1 Cor. xii. 13., dg h> aCjpa
i&cnrTiffdr)(Tav, between which and
the present passage a connecting
link is formed by Rom. vii. 4. :
f.Qava.TMQr]Tf. TU> vopw Sid TOV o"to/ua-
TOQ TOV XPKTTOV. So the Apostle
says: "By being baptized into
Christ we were baptized into a
common death."
Philosophy, as Plato says in
the Phsedo, is death ; so the Apo
stle says that Christian life is
death. It is a state in which we
are dead to the temptations of the
world, dead to all those things
which penetrate through the
avenues of sense, dead to the
terrors of the law, withdrawn
from our own nature itself,
shrunk and contracted, as it
were, within a narrow space,
hidden with Christ and God. It
is death and life at once, death
in relation to earth, and life in
relation to God.
4. From the death of Christ,
the Apostle passes on to the
burial of Christ, which is again
the link of transition to his re
surrection. The second member
VOL. II. O
of ver. 2. is here taken up :-
" We are dead to sin, and can
no longer live in it ; " for two
reasons, (1.) because we are bap
tized into the death of Christ, and
(2.) because the resurrection of
Christ is the type of our new life.
The meaning of this verse
will be more clearly brought out
if we recall the picture of Bap
tism in the apostolic age, when
the rite was performed by im
mersion, and Christians might
be said to be buried with Christ ;
and the passing of the Israelites
through the cloud and the sea
(1 Cor. x. 1, 2.), and even the
Deluge itself (1 Pet. iii. 21.),
seemed no inappropriate types of
its waters. Imagine not infants,
but crowds of grown up persons
already changed in heart and
feelings ; their " life hidden with
Christ and God," losing their per
sonal consciousness in the laver
of regeneration ; rising again
from its depths into the light of
heaven, in communion with God
and nature ; met as they rose
from the bath with the white
raiment, which is "the righteous
ness of the saints," and ever after
looking back on that moment as
the instant of their new birth, of
the putting off of the old man,
and the putting on of Christ.
Baptism was to them the figure
of death, burial^ and resurrection
all in one, the most apt expres-
194
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. VI.
TOV 4
crwTa</>77/xei> ovv avr<5 Sta TOV )8a7TTi<T^aros
Odvarov, Iva axnrep r^yepdrj ^/HCTTO? IK vtKp&v Sia rrjg
80^775 rov TraTp6<s, OUTW9 /ecu rjp,is iv Kaivor^n 0^779 Trepi-
7raTijcr(*)p,ev. el yap CTV^VTOI yeyovapev rco oju-otw/xari rou 5
Oavdrov CLVTOV, dXXa /ecu TT)S cb>acrrdcrecos ecroju,e#a, rouro 6
) on 6 TraXcuos o^co^ av0pa>Tros crvv(TTavpa)07] t
sion of the greatest change that
can pass upon man, like the sud
den change into another life
when we leave the body.
The Apostle introduces the
word "buried" instead of "died,"
to recall and assist the image of
baptism.
For similar allusions, compare
Gal. iii. 27.: 6 o-ot yap etc X! l<7 ~
TOV iaTTTi(rQr)T ^piffTOV evefivffa-
<70, and Coloss. ii. 12.: avvra^iv-
TEQ aVT(Z f.V TO) fla.7TTifTIJ.aTl, kv W
Kai rjvi iiyEpQrjTe ; also 1 Cor. xii.
13. : tv 7rvV[j.a. tTrortcrfl^^er, in
which there is a trace of the same
imagery.
tie 7ov SCLVCLTOV is to be taken
with $m rov f3aTTTtff[jLaTOQ, as in
the preceding verse, etc TOV
VU.TOV avTOv
IG orjQ TOV 7ra.TpOQ.~\
"in the glory of God the Fa
ther," as though Christ rose up
in the Divine presence and sud
denly became irradiated with its
glory ; but " through the glory
of the Father," which, as in other
places " the power of the Father,"
is here spoken of as an instru
ment. This is a simpler way of
taking the words, than as a
pleonastic expression for the Fa
ther himself. We have before
remarked, that St. Paul speaks
of that as an instrument which
we should consider as a mode.
Nor can it be wondered at, that
language should be peculiarly
wavering and uncertain on sub
jects that altogether transcend
language. Compare Col. i. 11.:
kv Traarrj fivvafjiei tWcijuov jutvoi Ka
ra TO KQO.TOQ TTJQ ^O^TjQ ai)TOV.
OVTWQ Kai fjuelc. As in Rom.
xiii. 1114., 1 Thess. v. 5
11., John, v. 24 28., the Apo
stle passes from resurrection to
renewal, from the coming of
Christ (iraoovrjia) to his presence
in the soul of man.
5. ffvu(f)VToi, united with him. ]
May either be taken absolutely,
" if we have been united with him
by the likeness of his death," or
" united with the likeness of his
death." In the first way of con
struing the passage, yv^vTOL TU
6poLU)fj.aTt is equivalent to ffvp<pv-
Tot TV opoioi elvai, " if we are
united with Him, by being like
Him in his death." According
to the second explanation we are
said to be united not with Him,
but with the likeness of His
death; that is, with the death to
sin, which is the image of the
death of Christ. " Planted toge
ther" in the English version is
too strong a translation for avfj.-
<f)VToi, which has lost the idea of
(pvio. oXXa Kai is emphatic, and
is equivalent to "immo etiam."
Compare two other usages of
aXXa cat, which afford together
the nearest trace of this use of
it in the apodosis : with ov juoVov,
as Phil. i. 8. ; ov porov Se yaipw
dXXa Kai y^aprjcropat ; and at the
commencement of sentences, as
VEB. 5, 6.J
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
195
were * buried with him by baptism into death : that like
as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of
the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of
5 life. For if we have been * united with him by the
likeness of his death, we shall be also * by the likeness
6 of his resurrection : knowing this, that our old man is
crucified with him, that the body of sin might be de-
in Luke
yvvcCiKig Ttveg,
" nay but."
xxiv. 22.:
"
nay
a, we shall be.~\ In the
eleventh verse, the Apostle speaks
of our living through Christ in
this present world. Hence it has
been supposed that in this pas
sage he is blending in one the
resurrection which is present, or
the renewal that he mentioned
just before, and the resurrection
which is to come. And it is
true that in the Apostle s mode
of thinking they are always
nearly connected. But here it
seems rather as though he were
dwelling on the resurrection that
is to come, as a motive for re
newal here. As though he said :
"We are dead with Christ,
therefore let us be dead to sin;
we shall rise with Christ here
after, therefore let us walk in
newness of life." Compare 1
Cor. xv. 49., " And as we have
borne the image of the earthly,
we shall also bear the image of
the heavenly ; " and Phil. iii. 9
11., "And be found in Him, not
having mine own righteousness,
which is of the law, but that
which is through the faith of
Christ, the righteousness which
is of God by faith : that I may
know Him, and the power of His
resurrection, and the fellowship
aXXa icai of His sufferings, being made
and " or conformable unto His death : if
by any means I might attain
unto the resurrection of the
dead." So 1 Thess. v. 4, 5.
6. TOVTO yirwa-KovTEs, knowing
this,~\ " and we know this." Com
pare 2 Pet. i. 20., iii. 3.
6 TraXatoQ IJ^JLMV aj 0/ow7roe.J
The image of the Christian, as
one with Christ, is still carried
on. Man falls asunder into two
parts corresponding to the two
divisions of Christ s life, and
leaves one of those parts hang
ing upon the cross. 6 -rraXaioQ
?//uJ}j avQpuiroQ our former self.
Compare : aTroOecrOai vfJLdt; KctTU
TYJV TrpoTtpav ai o.a Tpoiprjv TOV ira.-
\atov avSpwirov . . . Kal iv^vaa-
ffdai TOV KO.IVOV avtipuTrov, Eph.
iv. 22 24. ; 6 reoQ at ^WTTOC, Col.
iii. 10. ; \^v\ixoc aV0pu>7roc, 1 Cor.
ii. 14. ; also for the general sense
2 Cor. v. 17., " Therefore if any
man be in Christ, he is a new
creature : old things are passed
away ; behold, all things are
become new." Coloss. ii. 14.,
" Having blotted out the hand
writing of ordinances that was
against us, ... and nailed it to
his cross." The figure is some
what varied : our death to sin, v.
3, 4., is blended with the death of
sin, in v. 6., represented under the
image of the old man who is left
behind on the cross. The other as
pect of the figure returns in ver. 7.
o 2
196
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. VI.
Iva KaTapyyOfj TO crco/xa rrjs apapTLas, rou /zTiKeri SovXeuew
T7/>ia9 r>7 afJiapTia 6 yap airo9ava>v SeSi/ccuamu 0,770 TT^S 7
a/xaprtas. ei Se aTredavo^v crvv ypicrTO), TTicrrevo^v on 8
/ecu crvv&jcroiJiev avrq>, eiSores ore ^ptcrros eycpOels e/c 9
VtKp&V OVK6TL a7rO0VljCTKl. 6dvaTO<$ OLVTOV OVKtTl KVpiVl.
o yap airtOavev, rfj apapria aTrlOavtv ec^aTraf. o Se 77, 77 10
rrjg d^uapr/ae has been
taken in four ways :
(1.) The mass of sin.
(2.) The sinful body, the body
which is of sin, belongs to sin,
like (rtipa rfj^ crapKog, in Col. ii.
11. the fleshly body.
(3.) Sin which adheres to men
as a body, like Rom. vii. 24.,
" the body of this death," accord
ing to its most probable explana
tion. Or,
(4.) The body of sin may be a
continuation of the figure of the
old man who is identified with
sin, and has a body attributed to
him.
The last of these interpreta
tions is most in accordance with
the symbolism of the passage,
while the first two are plainly
repugnant to it.
TOV prjKln <)ov\vtv rjpag~^ 6X-
presses in the concrete, what had
previously been expressed in the
abstract, in the words iva
TO ffwfjia rg
7. o yap a.TroQavi*)v $f$tKaiurrat t
he that is dead has been justi
fied.^ The legal terms right and
wrong no longer apply to him.
It is a principle of the law itself
which the Apostle is adducing.
Compare vii. 1. : "The law
hath power over the man as long
as he liveth." There is also an
allusion in the word ^tKaiwrat
to the doctrine of righteous
ness by faith, which* is height
ened by the associations of the
previous ^ erse : " Not only he
that is dead sins no more, but
he has left his crimes behind
him, and paid the last penalty for
sin."
It is not quite clear whether
these words refer only to Christ,
or to the believer who is in his
image also. The latter is most
agreeable to the context. The
nerve of the Apostle s argument
was: "How shall we who are
dead to sin live any longer
therein ? " Continuing this
thought, he says : " We are dead
and buried with Christ, and
therefore should rise with him
to newness of life. We have
left the old man on the cross
with him, that the body of sin
may be done away. For death is
the quittance of sin." "How then
shall we any longer live in it ? "
is still the Apostle s inference ;
not only " how shall we who are
dead to sin," but, " how shall we
who are justified by death."
StKaLOVffBai OTTO Ttjg apaprlag,^
not to be justified, and so sepa
rated or freed from sin, structura
pr&gnanti, as it is termed, but
like StKaiMOfjvai OLTTO Travrwy, Acts,
xiii. 39.
8. A repetition of ver. 5. in a
slightly altered form, a new turn
being given to the words by their
juxtaposition with the previous
clause. As the dead is justified,
we believe that, as we are dead,
we shall rise again. The con
nexion which is here latent be
tween resurrection and justifica-
VER. 710.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
197
7 stroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For
s he that is dead has been justified * from sin. But * if
we be dead with Christ,* we believe that we shall also
9 live with him : knowing that Christ being raised from
the dead dieth no more ; death hath no more dominion
10 over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once :
tion is more clearly brought out
in iv. 25., v. 18.
In ver. 4., the Apostle had
been chiefly speaking of walking
in newness of life ; here the
words Triffrevofjiev ori imply that
he is referring to another life, as
in 2 Tim. ii. 11, 12. ; Col. i. 5.
9. We hope to be partakers
of his resurrection, knowing that
he dies no more. Sin and death
are connected together : he that
is dead is freed from sin, there
fore death hath no more dominion
over him. Such appears to be
the under current of the Apo
stle s thought, which is more
fully drawn out in the following
verse.
10. o yap cLiriQavEv, in that he
died.~\ The first question re
specting these words is, how we
may assign a uniform sense to
the dative in both members of
the sentence. A near parallel to
them occurs in Soph. Aj. 1106.
Seoc yap tKffwfei p.e, rwfie 3 oV^o-
/.iat, which might be translated
into the New Testament Greek,
rw()e TeOi>i]Ka, <o 5-ew. " In rela
tion to sin, or as far as sin is
concerned, he died, in relation to
God he lives." Compare 2 Cor.
xiii. 4. : el ivravpuitir) e affde-
vt/ctc, d\Xa %rj EK ^uyayufwg Seov*
The construction of 6 may be
explained either by supposing it
to be the case after a^iQavev or
in apposition with it : " for the
death which he died, or in that
he died ; " either way passing
into a conjunction.
But what is the meaning of
dying unto sin, or in relation to
sin, so far as sin is concerned,
once ? Sin and death are con
ceived of as inseparably con
nected with each other, and as
both appertaining to Christ on
earth. Sin is the sin of man by
whom he suffered, the sins of
mankind with which he united
himself, the terrors of the law,
according to which he fell under
the curse ; sin in every sense in
which figuratively or ideally it
can be applied to Christ (ch. iv.
25. : compare Sc TrapeSoOri c)ia ra
TTOjOaTTT-w/xara //yuwv feat ijyepQr} Sia
TYJV %iKa.itt)(nv j/^uwv). Of all this
he was quitted and cleared by
death. His death was but a
single, momentary act (e^aTra^),
which gave death, that king of
terrors, no real dominion over
Him. It was but a death unto
sin, the laying aside of a certain
relation in which He had stood to
a former dispensation. But His
life is infinitely real, He lives in
communion with God. Compare
Luke xx. 38.: "For all live
unto Him." We might para
phrase the passage as follows:
Death hatli no more dominion
over Him.
For His death was but the ne
gation of sin and death. His
life is a communion with the
source of life.
o 3
198
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cu. VI.
TOJ #e<. OVTO)<S Kal vjJLeis \oyitf.crOe eavrovs vtKpovs IJLZV rfj n
d/xapria 1 , aWas e rw $ea> e^ -^pLcrrco Irjcrov. 2 fjirj ovv ySacri- 12
XeveYa) 77 afjiapria Iv TCO 0vrjT( V\LU>V crcJ/xart eis TO viraKovtiv 3
rai? eiTiOvfJiiai^ avrov, ju/^Se TrapLcrrdveTe ra ^teX^ V/JLO>^ 6VXa 13
dSi/aas TT? d/Aapria, aAXd Trap 0,0*77? cra/re eavrovs rw
6VXa
wcrec e/c
KOL rd
TOJ Uea). apapna yap VJJLOJV ov KVpLevo~i ov yap ecrre 14
e\ / \\\e\ /
VTTO VOJJLOV, aAAa VTTO ^OLpLV.
Ti ovv; dju,apT770-a)//,J> 4 , on OVK ecr/xe^ VTTO vofjiov a\\a 15
yapiv; /XT) yevoiro. OVK oiSare on w TrapLcrrdveTe ie
8 OUT?? eV. 4 afji.apTrfffoiJ.fv.
body." We should rather have
expected: "Let not sin reign
in your body, which is already
dead." Various modes have been
adopted of avoiding the diffi
culty : (1.) Let not sin reign in
your flesh ; or, (2.) in your body,
which is appointed to die, of
which it is a solemn reflection
that it shall one day die ; or,
(3.) in which death is a figure of
a death unto sin.
The same use of the word
SvrjroG occurs in two other pas
sages : 6 kye if
Throughout this passage the
Apostle is identifying Christ and
the believers ; and conceptions,
primarily applicable or more in
telligible in reference to the one,
are transferred to the other. We
shall better apprehend his mean
ing, by beginning in a different
order. " For in that we die, we
die unto sin ; in that we live, we
live unto God." Our death with
Christ is the renunciation of sin
once for all, and the opening of a
new life unto God. Under this
figure of what the believer feels
in himself, the Apostle describes
the work of Christ. Death and
life are one but yet two in the
individual soul the negative
and positive side of the change
which the Gospel makes in him
so they are also in Christ.
11. As He dies and lives for
evermore, so also consider that
ye are dead, indeed, unto sin,
but alive unto God through Jesus
Christ. lv, instrumental, as in
ver. 23.
12. The Apostle had said
above : " How shall we who
are dead to sin, live any longer
therein?" He now says: "Let
not sin reign in your mortal
ra -^ra <rw-
yttara vp<Zv, Rom. viii. 11.; and in
2 Cor. iv. 11.: aet yap
<JJVTG etc Savarov Trap
Sid Irjaovv, iva. KCU // on
Irjffov fyarepwdrj iv TTJ Svrjrfj
rjfjLwr. In neither of these pas
sages can the sense be " liable to
death, mortal." The Apostle is
speaking of a state, not of pos
sible, but of actual death. Your
" corrupt " bodies, or your bodies
which are in a state of death,
would be a more exact translation.
So in the passage we are con
sidering, the word itself has
acquired a new meaning, from
the different point of view in
VER 1116.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
199
11 but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise
reckon ye also yourselves 1 dead indeed unto sin,
12 but alive unto God through Jesus Christ. 2 Let not
sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should
is obey 3 the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye your members
as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin : but yield
yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the
dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness
14 unto God. For sin shall not have dominion over you :
for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
is What then ? are we to sin 4 , because we are not under
IG the law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not,
1 Add to be.
2 Add our Lord.
8 Add it iu.
4 Shall we sin.
which the Apostle regards death.
Let not sin reign in your " dead
body," or your " body which is in
a state of death unto sin," is his
meaning. The figurative use of
Srriru is exactly parallel with
Svrjrfj ffapKt, in 2 Cor. iv. 11.
13. ju^^e TrajOtoravere.] Comp.
1 Cor. v. 16. : " Shall I take the
members of Christ and make
them the members of an harlot?"
Rom. xii. 1.: Trapaor^o-ui ra aa;-
juara vfjLUtv Svrtiav ^toaar.
14. It might seem, at first sight,
tautology to say, "Let not sin reign
over you, for sin shall not reign
over you." A slightly different
turn restores the meaning. Do
it, as we might say, for you are
able to do it. Present yourselves
to God as those who are alive
from the dead ; who were dead
once, but now alive ; under the
law once, but under grace now.
Instead of the outward and posi
tive rule, you have the inward
union with Christ; for the strength
of sin, the consciousness of for
giveness ; for fear, love ; for bon
dage, freedom ; for slavery, son-
ship ; for weakness, power. Such
an enlargement of the words of
the Apostle may be gathered from
other places. The yap expresses
the ground of motive and encou
ragement.
15. Thus far the Apostle has
argued, that we cannot continue
in sin because we are dead with
Christ. Going off upon the words
of the last verse, he now puts the
same argument in another point
of view : " We cannot serve two
masters." His servants we are
to whom we render our service,
of sin unto death, or of obedience
unto righteousness.
What then ? because we have
the promise that sin shall not
prevail over us, because we are
not bound merely by an exter
nal obligation, but endowed with
an inward power, shall we sin ?
Not so ; we cannot sin without
being the servants of sin ; whether
we choose for our masters sin or
righteousness, we are their ser
vants.
16. It seems like tautology to
say : " Whose servants ye make
o 4
200
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
[On. VI.
Se
e e/c
SouXovs ei? viraKoriv, SovXoi ecrre cS VTTGLKOVT,
djutaprias 19 6dvaTov rj vTraKorjs eis Stfcaiocrw^^ ;
Se T< #ea>, on 07x6 SouXoir^s a/xapria?, i>7rr)Kovo-aTe 17
ets o*> TrapeSd^re TUTTO^ SiSa^s IXevOepa)- ls
d/^aprtas lSov\a)OrjT rfj SiKaiOcrvvr).
av6p(*)TTivov Xeya) Sid TJyp dcr$eVeicu> TTJS crap/cos V^MV. 19
axTTrep yap Trapecrr^crare TO, jiteX^ v^v SovXa r^ clfca-
BapcrLa /cat r^ avopia eis T^v avopiav, OVTOJ vvv TrapacrTrj-
crare rol /x-eX^ v/^wz/ SovXa r^ St/caiocrw^ eis ayiacr^6v. ore 20
Se (XTTO
yourselves, his servants ye are."
Accordingly, Lachmann, in his
preface, has given up the word J,
and conjectures we. It may be
objected that the emendation is
weak, and that the words as
they stand are very much after
the manner of St. Paul. They
admit, moreover, of a sufficient
sense, even supposing the Apostle
to have meant nothing more than
an emphatic repetition : "Know
ye not that what ye are, ye are."
But what he says is not precisely
this, but "Know ye not that
what ye make yourselves, ye are ? "
the first clause expressing a vo
luntary and temporary act, and the
second its permanent conse
quence. " To whomsoever ye
offer yourselves as slaves, his
slaves ye are, and will not cease to
be." There is a line drawn be
tween the two services of sin and
righteousness which you cannot
pass.
As if unable to find another
word, the Apostle repeats uTra/coy
in the latter part of the sentence
in a new sense. The antithesis
of SiKaioffvvr) and QavaroQ belongs
to the form rather than the mean
ing. Comp. Rom. x. 10.
In Greek we often find a par
ticiple where, in a modern lan
guage, a verb would be employed,
and a sentence made independent.
In the Greek of the New Tes
tament the opposite, however,
sometimes happens ; we have a
verb used where a participle
would be more natural. Thus,
in the present passage, the mean
ing is : " Thanks be to God,
that having been the servants of
sin, ye became the servants of
righteousness," "that ye were
and became," the two clauses
being regarded as one. Compare
Eph. v. 8. : //re yap TTOTE ororoe, vvv
c) (ffiog kv KfjO/w.
17. vTTYjKovffare EIQ ov Trapeco-
drjTE TV7TOV Clfia. xfJQ = V7rrjKOV<TCLT
TW TV-ITU ^t^n^rjg eiQ ov Trapefiodrjre.
The singularity of this attraction
of the antecedent into the case of
the relative, consists in the cir
cumstance that the dative is thus
resolved. Comp. Rom. iv. 17. ;
Acts xxi. 16., ayovrec Trap J c-
ri(r6u}pev Mmerwvi, where, not
withstanding the attempt of Winer
( 31, 2.) to show that aytiv may
govern a dative, the inverted at
traction is far more natural.
18. Ye were freed from sin and
made the servants of righteous
ness.
19. di^dpcjTrifov \iyit) = fear av-
dpwTrov Xe yw.] I use human lan
guage. Sometimes, as in I Cor.
ix. 8., opposed to the words of the
VER. 17 20.J EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
201
that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his
servants ye are to whom ye obey ; whether of sin unto
17 death, or of obedience unto righteousness ? But God be
thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have
obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine whereto ye
is were delivered*; and* being made free from sin, ye
19 became the servants of righteousness. I speak after the
manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh.
For as ye have yielded your members servants to un-
cleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity ; even so now
yield your members servants to righteousness unto
20 * sanctification. For when ye were the servants of sin,
law, ?} Kar .avdptiHrov TCLVTO. XaXw */
KCU 6 vo^iOQ Tavra ov XaXtl ; or as
in Rom. iii. 5., used as a sort of
apology for a seemingly profane
mode of speech ; or, as in Gal.
iii. 15., a^eX^o/, Kara
\l-yw. 6fiu)Q civdpwTTo
Seic dderel >/
where it means simply, " I
use a human figure of speech,"
as in this passage, in reference to
the expression, " slavery to right
eousness."
cita ri]v dadlyetav rr}c ffapKOQ
vpo)v.~] I speak of a service
after the manner of men ; because
your flesh is still weak, and there
fore with you to be righteous, is
to be the servant of righteous
ness ; or because ye are slow of
understanding (compare Heb. v.
11, 12.), and therefore I speak of
your present state under a figure
derived from your former one.
Comp. viii. 20. : " For the
creature was made subject to
vanity, not willingly, but by rea
son of Him who hath subjected
the same in hope, for the crea
ture itself also shall be delivered
from the bondage of corruption
into the glorious liberty of the
children of God."
rrj avo(j.iq, EIQ ri]r avopiav.^
With no other end but lawless
ness.
20, 21. The connexion of these
two verses has been traced as
follows : there was a time when
you were in the opposite state,
when you were the slaves of sin,
and had a seeming freedom from
righteousness. Compare the two
states. What does your expe
rience tell you of the fruit of
sin ? Things of which you are
now ashamed, for the end of those
things is death.
Adopting Lachmann s punctu
ation, it must be admitted that,
according to this way of taking
the passage, the point of TO /ZEV
yap 7-f Xog iKEivuv SavaroQ is lost
in some degree ; for these words
supply a good answer to the ques
tion, "What fruit had ye?" but
are an inappropriate reason " for
their being ashamed of these
things."
It may be objected also that
the relative clause is a harsh and
abrupt answer to the question.
202
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cu. VI.
yap SovXot yT TTJS ajJiapTLas, i\ev6epoi fjre rfj
riva ovv Kaptrov et^ere rare; e</> of? j w eTraicr^wecr^e * 21
TO jjiev 1 yap reXos e/cet^a)^ #dVa,TOs* z wl Se IXevfJepaiOevTes 22
8ov\aj6evTS Se T< #e
els dyiacr/^oV, TO e TeXos anr)z atw
a/7ro
Kapirov
TO, yap 6i//oj^ta
^eoi)
cuomos e
TO Se ^aptcr/xa 23
J^crou TW Kvpico
1 Omit juei .
It is better to take the words
</> ole j 0/ iirai.cr^vyffd neither as
the answer to the question, nor
as a part of the question, but as
a parenthesis thrown in by the
way.
As though the Apostle had
said : " For when you were the
servants of sin, you were not the
servants of righteousness. What
fruit had you then of those
things ? (which I cannot mention
without telling you that you are
now ashamed of them)." The
answer is implied in what fol
lows : " You had no fruit, for
the end of those things is death.
But now ye are the servants of
righteousness, and not the ser
vants of sin, you have a fruit, the
end of which is not death, but
eternal life." There is an exact
parallelism between ver. 20, 21,
and 22., with the exception that
the words of the question riva
ovv Kapler Eiytre. ; are exchanged
for X r v KOffKov vfj.wr in the
succeeding verse.
VER. 2123.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
203
21 ye were free* as touching* righteousness. What fruit
had ye then? things whereof ye are now ashamed; for
2 the end of those things is death. But now being made
free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your
fruit unto sanctificatiori *, and the end everlasting life.
J For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is
eternal life in* Jesus Christ our Lord.
iXevdepoi rrj ^LKatoffvr^.^ Right
eousness was not your master ;
you were free as far as she was con
cerned. The dative may be ex
plained either by the parallelism
of SoiiXoc or as a dative of relation.
23. The evil that we receive
at the hand of God is deserved,
but the good undeserved. Sin
has its wages, and yet eternal life
is a free gift. How can we main
tain this paradox, which is, more
over, a form of expression natural
to us ?
It is quite true that the good
and evil which we receive at the
hands of God is exactly propor
tioned by his justice and wisdom
to our deserts. But what we
intend to express by such forms
of speech is: (1.) Our feeling
that he is, in a special sense, the
author of our salvation as well
as of all good ; (2.) That what
ever may be our deserts in his
eye, they would lose their very
nature if we regarded them as
deserts.
204 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
CHAP. VII.
Ver. 17.
IN the same way that in 1 Cor. ix. 9, 10., the Apostle argues
from the verse in the law " Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that
treadeth out the corn," adding that " this was written for our sakes,"
he proceeds, at the commencement of this chapter, to argue from a
principle of the law which we have observed to have been already
in his thoughts in ver. 7. of the chapter preceding. Such an
argument, although by ourselves it would be regarded as a figure
of speech or an illustration, was after the manner of those times,
and came home with peculiar force to the mind of the Jew. The
form of authority with which he introduces it, does not allow us to
suppose that he intended it himself as an illustration. It would be
more true to say that such a distinction as that between " illus
tration " and " argument " had no existence in the mind of the
Apostle.
According to the similitude which the Apostle here uses, the
relation of the Jew to the law is likened to the case of a wife who has
lost her husband. As a widow the law, of course, said that she
might marry again ; her husband had no claim on her. Even so
the law itself was dead, and the Jew was free to marry again to
Christ, who was not dead, but risen from the dead.
There is, however, a difficulty in the application of the similitude
in ver. 4, 5, 6. This arises from the believer being regarded in
two points of view. In the figure he is compared to the wife, while
in the application he seems to change places, and become identified
with the husband, who, in a certain sense, as well as the wife, is
freed from the law ; for " he that is dead, has been freed from sin."
For this change there seem to be two reasons : First, In working
out the figure, the resemblance of the Christian to the husband as
EPISTLE TO THE EOMANS. 205
well as to the wife, strikes the Apostle ; for as the husband is dead,
so also is the Christian dead to the law. Secondly, The change may
be regarded as a sort of euphemism to Jewish ears. The Apostle
avoids the harshness of saying that " the law is dead," by substi
tuting " ye are dead to the law."
" The wife is dead to the law " in reference to a single point ; that
is, " she is loosed from the law of the husband " (ver. 2.), " she may
marry again " (ver. 3.).
So also the chain is snapped by which the believer is bound to the
law itself; he may marry again to " Him that is raised from the dead."
Instead, however, of drawing out further " the death of the law,"
the Apostle turns the figure round, and compares the believer no
longer to the living wife, but to the dead husband (read aTroQavovre^
in ver. 6.).
"The husband is dead to the law " in general; it has no more
dominion over him: he is quit of it not in one point but in all.
The dead husband, in ver. 4, 5, 6., equally with the surviving wife, in
ver. 1, 2, 3., is an image of the relation in which the Christian stands
to the law, as dying to it, although he survives it. See notes.
Besides the slighter verbal connexion of this passage with ver. 7.
of the previous chapter (6 yap cnrodavuv SediKa iwTai awo rfJQ d/zapr/ac;),
which has been already mentioned, there is a deeper connexion also
with the whole of the preceding subject.
In the previous chapter the believer had been described as dead
unto sin, but alive unto righteousness. " Sin," said the Apostle,
" shall have no more dominion over you ; for ye are not under the
law, but under grace." This thought he carries out further in the
present passage, illustrating it by the particular case of the woman
and the husband, which, in the language of the Epistle to the
Galatians, shows, in a figure, " that the law is dead to us, and we
to the law." The only difference is that in the last chapter what
the Apostle was speaking of was a " death unto sin ; " here rather
of what in his view is so closely connected as to be almost identical
with it, " a death unto the law." It is the close connexion between
them that leads him to guard, in verse 7., against the possible in
ference that " the law is sin."
206
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[OH. VII.
*H ayvotLTe, dSeX</>oi, (yivvo-Kovcriv yap popov XaX&&gt;) ,
cm 6 VOJJLOS KvpLVL TOV avdpa)Trov Ifi ocTOv yjpovov fi rj 2
yap vTravSpos yvvr) ra t>vn av^pl SeSerat ^d/xor eav 8e
a7ro9dvri 6 avrfp, KarrfpyrjTai OLTTO TOV vopov TOV avSpos.
dpa ovv aWos TOV az/Spos /xot^aXt? ^Tj/xaTicrei, e ai> yeVr;- 3
rat, cb Syo! eTepar ecu; Se aTroOdvri 6 avrfp, IXevdepa ecrri^ 0,770
TOT) Popov, TOV /XT) et^at, avTJ)v /xoi^aXtSa, ytvopev^v avpl
ere)ow. wcrre, deXc/)oc /xov, Kal v/Aets e^ai/arcJ^re raJ ^O/AOJ 4
Sea TOU o-w/xaro? rov ^picrroi), et? TO ye^ecr^at v/xcis erepw,
TO CAC vtKp&v lyepOevTL, Iva Kapiro^opria u^v ra> ^ea>. ore 5
yap 77/zei e^ rij crapKi, ra TraOij^aTa TO*V apapTitov ra Sta
TOV VQJJLOV evrjpyeiTO iv TOIS jueXecr^ ^wz^ eig TO Kaptro-
VII. The Apostle begins by
asserting the general principle,
and illustrates it by a particular
case. He reminds the Roman
Church that they knew the law
(a passing allusion not without
interest and importance to us.
See Introduction). Now the
power of the law, as they also
knew, did not extend beyond life ;
the proof of this being the fami
liar case of the dissolution by
death of the relations of husband
and wife.
1. TOV ai QpwTTovi of the man."]
Not the husband, but the subject
of the law.
OTOV yjporov y-^\ Not "so
long as the law liveth " (which, if
the expression were itself tole
rable, would be a self-evident
and unmeaning proposition) ; but,
" so long as he, that is, the man
liveth, who is the subject of the
law."
Sederat, Kari ipyiirai, " has been
and is," the perfect expressing
the continuance of the state of
bondage or freedom from the
law. The word K-arapy7<r0cu, " to
be set at nought, made void," is
here used structura prcegnanti ;
that is, it is followed by O.TTO as
though some other verb had pre
ceded. Compare Gal. v. 4. : *a-
Tr}pyj]driT UTTO TOV xpiffTOv.
X|0^ar/^v,in its earlier sense,
means to do business, to give
audience : hence its two mean
ings in the New Testament :
(1.) simply to be called or have a
title, as Polybius (v. 57. 2.) uses
the expression, /3ao-tXta
^iv, and
Acts xi. 26.,
O.VOVQ : (2.) in the passive
Ti^eadatj to be warned, or receive
an answer or intimation, as in
the phrase \P 1 ll JLariff ^ iQ
Matt. ii. 22.
4. UKTTE VfJ.elQ iQo.VO.T(jjBr]T.~\ TllC
Apostle changes the figure. The
words EOavaTojQrjTe and cnrotiaruv-
TLIQ are too strong to allow us to
suppose that he is still describing
the death of the believer to the
law under the image of the wife ;
who is not dead, but only freed
by death. This latter image,
however, reappears in the next
words, EIQ TO yeviaQai vyude tTepw.
For a similar change, comp. ch.
vi. 5, 6, 7. ; 1 Thess. v. 2. 4.
ctd TOV <rajfj,aroG TOV
VER. 1
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
207
7 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that
know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a
2 man as long as he liveth? For the woman which hath
an husband is bound by the law to her husband* that
liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from
s the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband
liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be
called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is
free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though
4 she be married to another man. Wherefore, my brethren,
ye also are become dead to the law by the body of
Christ; that ye should be married to another, to him who
is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit
5 unto God. For when we were in the flesh, the motions
of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members
These words have been para
phrased by some interpreters:
"Through the body of Christ
which is the substance of which
the law is the shadow," as in
Col. ii. 17. o kffT(.v tr/aa rwv pe\-
\6v u)i>, TO $e <rttJ/.a TOV yjiiaTOv.
Here, however, <rw/.ia is only used
for substance, in opposition to
ffKit t. In our present passage,
it is better to understand Sid TOV
ffwpciToc; TOV ^piorou, as meaning
" by the death of Christ," which
is thus signified by his mortal
part, in opposition to iyepOtvTi.
The word o-w/^a may have been
chosen instead of -Savaroc, to
express the accessory idea of a
communion of many members
in one body, as in Col. i. 24.,
" The body of Christ which is
the church." Comp. above vi.
3., /3a7r-t (T0r/-f tic; TOV SaraTor ;
and the Christian use of the
figure of marriage, Eph. v. 32.,
"This is a great mystery, but
I speak concerning Christ and
the church ; " also 1 Cor. vi. 17., 6
rw Kvpa) ty 7rviv[j,a.
IffTlV.
KupTrofyoprjffut, ] here and in v. 5.,
is an allusion to the word /coprroc,
in ver. 21, 22., of the previous
chapter.
5. Goes back a step to contrast
the previous with the present
state; yap is explanatory : "For
when we were in the state of
sinful flesh, that is, when we
were under the law, the sinful
affections which the law created,
wrought in our members to bring
forth fruit unto death."
The Apostle here takes the
same view of the relation of the
law and sin as in the following
paragraph. Death is not the
consequence of sin, but rather
the joint result of sin and of the
law.
The affections which spring from
sins or which cause sins ; or
better, more generally, which be
long to sins. Compare
dv^iac,
208
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. VII.
TO OavaTO) vvvi Se
diroOavovTes 1
zv
a>
kv
0,770 rov vo
atcrre
Kal ov TraXaidr^rt
rvi ta rov yo/zov] not " in the
state of the law," but " of which
the law is the instrument."
Comp. ver. 8. and ch. v. ver. 19.
6. vvvl $e KaTr)pyridrjfj.v CLTTO
TOVv6pov,a.7rodav6i>TogTOV Savarov
iv u KaTEt-^ofJitQa, A. G. f. g. V.
vvv\ $F KaTrjpyrjdri/jiEV diro rov
rofjiov diroQavovTEQ kv w Ka.rf.iyji)-
peOa, A. B. C.
The latter reading, which is
adopted by Lachmann, is probably
the true one. It is sometimes
translated "Being dead to that
wherein we were held." It is
simpler to connect kv & with
drro rov vopov. " But now, by
dying, we are separated from the
law in which we were held."
wore $ov\Viv */jud.] Comp. vi.
22. The moral and the positive,
the written and the unwritten,
the letter that killeth and the
Spirit that giveth life, are con
trary the one to the other.
7 25. The question which
naturally arises in reading the
following passage, is that of the
Eunuch to Philip: " Of whom
saith the Apostle this, of himself
or of another ? " or, in other
words : "Is he speaking of the
regenerate or of the unregenerate
man ? " Accordingly as we an
swer this question, the doctrine
of the Epistle assumes a different
character. If we say "of him
self and the regenerate man,"
might we not add in his own
words ? " Your faith is vain,
ye are yet in your sins." The
Gospel has done nothing more
than strengthen and deepen the
consciousness of sin. By the
Gospel, no less than by the
law, shall " no flesh be justified ;"
"for," as we may reason with
the Apostle (iii. 20.), "by the
gospel is the knowledge of sin."
Then is the believer " of all men
most miserable ; " for, assuredly,
the heathen is not subject to that
distraction of nature, which is
here described. He has passed
into a state in which he is not
one but two ; instead of being
reconciled with God, he is at
war with self. The light of
peace is not within him, but at
a distance from him ; seen, for
a moment only, revealing the na
ture of the struggle.
Nothing but the exigencies of
controversy would have induced
Augustine, against his better
mind and the authority of the
earlier Fathers, to refer this pas
sage to the condition of the re
generate man. He was led to
this interpretation, as others have
been, by the equal, if not greater,
difficulty of referring the descrip
tion of the Apostle to the unre
generate.
The latter interpretation is
plainly repugnant to the spirit of
the passage ; for whom shall we
conceive the Apostle to be de
scribing ? or, rather> which is the
same thing, whom do we ourselves
mean by the term unregenerate?
Is it the Jew, or the heathen, or
the hypocrite, or the sensualist ?
To none of these characters will
VEB. 6.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
209
6 to bring forth fruit unto death. But now, being dead,
we are delivered from the law L wherein \ve were held ;
and so * we serve in newness of spirit, and not in the old-
ness of the letter.
1 Omit " being dead," and add " that being dead " after " the law."
such a description refer. They
know of no struggle between the
things they would and would
not; they live in no twilight
between good and evil ; their
state is a lower and less con
scious one. Who would speak
of the unregenerate heart of
Caesar or of Achilles ? Language
itself teaches us the impropriety
of such expressions. And the
reason of the impropriety is, that
we feel with the Apostle, though
our point of view may be some
what different, that the guilt of
sin is inseparable from the know
ledge of sin. Those who never
heard the name of Christ, who
never admit the thought of Christ,
cannot be brought within the cir
cle of Christian feelings and as
sociations.
There have been few more
frequent sources of difficulty in
theology, than the common fal
lacy of summing up inquiries
under two alternatives, neither of
which corresponds to the true
nature of the case. We may
admit the logical proposition
that all things are animal or not
animal, vegetable or not vege
table, mineral or not mineral.
But we cannot say that all men
are civilised or uncivilised, Chris
tian or unchristian, regenerate
or unregenerate. Such a mode
of division is essentially erro
neous. It exercises a false in
fluence on the mind, by tending
to confuse fixed states and trans
itions, differences in degree with
VOL, II.
differences in kind. All things
may be passing out of one class
into another, and may therefore
belong to both or neither. The
very attempt to classify or divide
them may itself be the source of
an illusion.
Obvious as such a fallacy is, it
is only by the light of experi
ence that theology can be freed
from it. From " the oppositions
of knowledge falsely so called,"
we turn to the human heart itself.
Reading this passage by what we
know of ourselves and other
men, we no longer ask the ques
tion : " Whether the Apostle
is speaking of the regenerate or
unregenerate man ? " That is
an " after-thought," which has
nothing to correspond to it in
the world, and nothing to justify
it in the language of the Apostle.
Mankind are not divided into re
generate and unregenerate, but
are in a state of transition from
one to the other, or too dead and
unconscious to be included in
either. What we want to know is
the meaning of the Apostle, not
in the terms of a theological pro
blem, but in the simpler manner
in which it presented itself to his
own mind.
He is speaking of a conflict in
the soul of man, the course of
which, notwithstanding its sud
den and fitful character, is never
theless marked by a certain pro
gress. It commences in childish
and unconscious ignorance
("I was alive without the law
210
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. VII.
Ti ovv Ipovpev; 6 ^dftos ajuta/ma; prj yeVoiro dXXa 7
TT?Z> ajJLapTiav OVK cyvuv d prj Sia z/o/^ov. try re yap
OVK yjSew, ei /XT) o vopos eXeyez , OVK eTnOvprjcreLS
Se \a/3ovcra r) apapria Sia 7779 eVroX^s /careipya- 8
once"), which is succeeded by
the deep consciousness of sin,
which the law awakens, and so
hovering between death and life,
passes on to the last agony and
final deliverance. The stages of
this contest are not exactly
defined. In the earliest of them
is an element of reason and of
good ; in the latest, we seem only
to arrive at a more intense con
viction of human misery. The
progress is not a progress from
works to faith, or from the law
to grace, but a growing separa
tion and division, in which the
soul is cut in two into the
better and the worse mind, the
inner and the outer man, the
flesh and the Spirit. The law is
the dividing principle, " sharper
than any two-edged sword,"
which will not allow them to
unite. On the one side remains
the flesh, as it were, a decom
posing body of death ; on the
other, the mind and spirit flutter
in lawless aspirations after good
which they have no means or in
struments to attain. The extre
mity of the conflict is the moment
of deliverance ; when completely
in the power of sin, we are al
ready at the gate of heaven.
In this spiritual combat, in the
description of which he adopts the
first person, is he really speaking
of himself or of some other man ?
The question with which we be
gan has been already answered.
The description which has just
been given, could not have been
meant as an epitome of his own
daily experience. It may describe
the struggle of Luther at a par
ticular crisis of his life, not the
habitual temper of St. Paul. We
cannot imagine him daily "doing
the things that he would not, and
not doing the things that he
would." Least of all can we sup
pose him to say this of himself
just after the words which have
preceded, in which he has been
contrasting the present service of
the believer "in newness of
Spirit," with oldness of the letter.
One might ask further, which of
the many states which are des
cribed in this passage (vii. 7
viii. 17.) is the state of the Apo
stle himself? On the other hand,
it is true that the use of the first
person is not merely rhetorical. It
seems as though the Apostle were
speaking partly from recollec
tions of his former state, partly
from the emotions of sin, which
he still perceived in his mem
bers, now indeed pacified and
kept under control, yet suffi
ciently sensible to give a liveli
ness to the remembrance, and
make him feel his dependence
on Christ. So much of the
struggle continued in him as he
himself describes in such passages
as 2 Cor. i. 9, 10., or xii. 7. He
who says, "without were fight
ings, within fears " (2 Cor. v. 7.),
who had " the sentence of death
in himself," and " a messenger of
Satan to buffet him," could not
have lived always in an unbroken
calm of mind, any more than we
can imagine him to have been
VEB. 7, 8.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
211
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God
forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for
I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou
8 shalt not lust.* But sin, taking occasion by the co in
constantly repeating, " O wretched
man that I am ! " Further, we
may remark, that the combat, as
it deepens, becomes more ideal,
that is, removes further away
from the actual consciousness of
mankind ; the Apostle is de
scribing tendencies in the heart of
man which go beyond the expe
rience of individuals.
7. TV
What shall
we say then?~\ If the law was
the instrument whereby the mo
tions of sins worked in our mem
bers (ver. 5.), if we are freed
from sin by being dead to the
law (ver. 6.), what shall we say?
"Is the law sin?" It has been
nearly identified in what pre
cedes, it is all but sin in what
follows. There is reason for us
to pause before going further.
6 vofjioc, the law.~] But what
law? the Mosaic, or the law writ
ten on the heart ? We can only
gather from the passage itself,
which leads us rather to think of
a terrible consciousness of sin,
than of questions of new moons,
and sabbaths. " What shall we
say then," we might paraphrase,
" is conscience sin ? "
To shift the meaning of vo^oc,
or to assign remote and different
significations to the word in suc
cessive verses, may seem like a
trick of the interpreter. Whether
it really be so or not, must depend
on the fact of how St. Paul uses
the word, and on the general use
of language in his age. Compare
Col. ii. 1623. for three distinct
uses of the word o-w/za ; also vii.
21 viii. 4. for several changes
in the sense of VOJJ.OG, and viii.
19 22. for similar changes in
the sense of KTICTIQ.
pi ytVotro.] If by being freed
from the law, we are freed from
sin what shall we say ? " Is the
law sin ? " It comes indeed very
near to being so, because sin is in
separable from the consciousness
of sin which, considered objec
tively, is the law. But on the
other hand, such is the para
doxical nature of the law, that in
another point of view it delivers
us from sin. Without the law
there is no sin, and no possibility
of avoiding sin. We feel its evil,
we cannot also avoid acknow
ledging its truth. a XAa em
phatically introduces an adverse
fact, " nay ; so far is the law from
being sin I should never have
known of sin but for the law."
OVK eyvwj/ : av is omitted, as in ix.
3. and with OVK r/3t tv, the omission
adding force, as, in English, " I
had" is a stronger expression
than " I should have had."
ri\v T yap eTridvfjiiav^ has no
reference to particular precepts.
The Apostle means to say, "I had
never known lust, which is the
parent of sin (cf. James i. 15.),
but for the law : lust would not
have been lust to me but for the
general command of the law,
Thou shalt not lust.
and
yvwv,inthe sense of acquaintance
with a person.
8. In this verse the Apostle
turns to the other side of the ar
gument. The extremes meet.
p 2
212
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. VII.
craro eV e/>toi irao-av eiriOv^iap. x^P 7P v f lov a/xa/ma 9
d, eya> Se e&&gt;*> x<y/ns vopov TTOTC l\6ovcry]s Se TTJS
rjs 17 djaa/m a dvefycrev, eya> Se d-rreOavov, /cat evpeOrj 10
17 eVroX^ 17 eis 0)77^, CCV TT? efc BdvaToV f] yap dpaprla n
r)v Xafiovora Sid TT?S eVroXTJs e ^Trar^creV /x,e Acal Si
uT7?s direKTewev. wore 6 //,o> z^d/xos aytos, /cat 17 eVroX?) 12
The law forbade me to sin, and
yet sin took its occasion and origin
through the law. For sin with
out the law is dead, non-existent,
not sin at all.
The law is sin, for without the
law sin could not exist.
The law is not sin, for the law
itself says "Thou shalt not
commit sin."
So far as sin is inseparable
from the consciousness of sin, the
law is the strength of sin.
So far as the knowledge of sin
is the first step to amendment,
the law is the opposite of sin.
It may be asked, How can the
law increase the temptation to
sin ? It may not make men better ;
how does it make them worse?
Human nature errs under the in
fluence of passion, from propen-
sions, as Bishop Butler terms
them, towards external objects,
not because there is a law which
forbids them. For a fuller answer
to this difficulty the reader is re
ferred to the Essay on the Law
as the Strength of Sin, the heads
of which may be summed up as
follows :
First, By sin the Apostle means
the consciousness of sin, consci-
entia peccati, not any mere ex
ternal act vicious or criminal.
This consciousness of sin is the
reflection of the law in the mind
of the subject. The law = the
consciousness of sin ; the con
sciousness of sin = sin, i. e. the
law is almost sin. But secondly,
It must not be lost sight of that,
by the law, the Jewish law is
also partly meant, with its ever
increasing burden of ordinances,
which in an altered world it was
impossible to obey, seeming by
its hostility to the preaching of
the Gospel to be an element of
discord in the world, like the
consciousness of evil in the soul
of man. Thirdly, The state which
the Apostle describes in the fol
lowing verses, is in some degree
ideal and imaginary. It begins
with absolute ignorance (I was
alive without the law once), and
ends with the utter disruption of
the soul between will and know
ledge. But these extreme cases
do not exist in fact, though they
may be truly used to exhibit ten
dencies in human nature. If we
imagine Adam in a state of inno
cence, a child not yet in the sim
plicity of its nature come to a
knowledge of right and wrong,
and at the other extreme a sinner
plunged in the recklessness of
despair by the contrast of his
life and the holiness of God, and
at some point of this progress the
law coming in that the offence
may abound, there will be less
difficulty in comprehending the
Apostle s meaning; the real dif
ficulty being to fix the point of
view from which the description
is drawn.
9. x w P l 7&P vufjiov gives a second
VEB. 9 12.J
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
213
9 mandment, wrought in me all manner of lust.* For
without the law sin was dead, and* I was alive without
the law once: but when the commandment came, sin
10 revived, and I died. And the commandment, which
11 was to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking
occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it
12 slew me. Wherefore the law is holy, and the command-
reason why " I had not known
sin," which is the first expressed
over again in a negative form:
"For the commandment quick
ened sin ; for, without the law, sin
was dead." eyw $e is opposed to
dpaprta, as arer)ff to e^wy, and
(nriQavov to dve^ri<re.
Sin and the law came into ex
istence in me at once. "There
was a time before the law when
I was alive." Perhaps, in child
hood, as the Apostle says in
1 Cor. xiii. 11., "When I was a
child, I thought as a child;" or,
without any particular reference,
"I was alive when I was uncon
scious of the law," whether the
state of unconsciousness be that
of childhood, or of what we some
times term the childhood of the
human race, ere the law was
given.
" But when the commandment
came, sin revived, and I died." The
Apostle is not speaking of his
committing actual sin and suffer
ing death as a penalty. What is
here termed death is the state
which he is about to describe, in
which the soul has no harmony
either with the natural or the
spiritual world.
10. And the commandment
which was to life, was found
by me to be unto death.
An illustration may assist us
in realising the Apostle s mean
ing. Suppose a person liable to
two bodily disorders of a different
kind. He is weak, but the means
taken to restore health and
strength raise a fever in his veins.
If we could keep him weak, he
might live ; as it is, he dies. So
it might be said of the law, that
it is too strong a medicine for
the human soul.
11. ifyTrarrjffev, deceived me."]
The passions of men s nature
carry them away from the service
of God and virtue. But the law
has a further operation ; it is the
instrument of deception which is
employed in the service of sin.
(Compare 2 Cor. xi. 3.: "As the
serpent deceived Eve.") We may
figure sin pointing to the law ;
it says, "Lo! this is what God
requires of thee. Sin boldly, for
thou canst not obey." The soul,
taught out of the law, knows the
truth of this. It cannot answer
the reasonings of sin, which has
found an occasion against it out
of the law itself. Compare v. 13.
The difficulty of the verse
arises from its figurative charaC"
ter. In plain language, the Apo
stle means generally what he had
said before, that the law made
sin to be what it is. The word
i^7ra,Tr]fre only implies further,
that the law causes the insidious-
ness of sin ; it makes sin to be
sin and also deception.
12. is connected with the whole
of the preceding passage. " Is
r 3
214
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. VII.
ayia KO! Strata Kal ayaOij TO ovv ayaOov e/xol eyeVero 1 13
Bavaros; ^ yevoiro, a\\ rj a/xaprta, Iva <f)avfj apapria,
Sia TOV ayadov poi Karepyatp^w) Odvarov, Iva yevrjTai
Kaff VTrepfioXrjv apaprcoXos rj a^apria Sia r^s eVroX^?.
yap on 6 VOJJLOS TT^ev/xari/cos eorw, eya> Se crap- u
7670^6.
the law sin?" After balancing
the two sides of this question, the
conclusion at which the Apostle
arrives is, that the law is "holy,
just, and good." It was the law
that made sin to be what it was,
and it is true that this conies very
near to the law being itself sin.
But the other side has also to be
put forward. Sin is the active
cause, the law only the occasion,
the deceiver being human nature
itself, and the law forbidding sin
at the moment it seems to create
it. So that the law, in itself, is
no more polluted than the sun in
the heavens by the corruption on
which it looks. The obscurity in
this, as in many other passages,
arises from the Apostle, in the
alternation of thought, dwelling
too long on that side of the ar
gument, which, for the sake of
clearness, should have been sub
ordinate. In this instance, he has
said so much of the commandment
being found unto death and the
occasion of sin, that he is obliged
to make a violent resumption of
the thought with which he com
menced.
13. But a person might ask,
How can I call it good ? Did that
which was good, become death
unto me ? The answer admits of
being taken in two ways : (1.)
Not so ; but sin, that it might
appear sin, was working death to
me through the good (sup. r>) ; or,
(2.) Not so ; it was not the good,
but sin that became death, that
it might appear, as it really was,
working death through the good.
The first and second 1W admit
of being construed in three ways :
either they may be co-ordinated
so that the second is the epexegesis
of the first, as thus ,"Sin, that it
might appear sin, that it might
become more sin ; " or the second
iva may be made subordinate and
regarded as carrying the thought
a step further, " Sin, that it might
appear sin, and by appearing be
come yet more sin," a thought
which seems to be much after
the manner of St. Paul; or, lastly,
the second iVa may be connected
with the clause immediately pre
ceding, as follows :
f] apapria [eyeVero
IVCL (f)a.vi] a
S avarov, tVa
We can imagine a state of
mind in an individual, or a con
dition in society, in which vice
loses "half its grossness," and
some of its real evil, either by
the veil of refinement beneath
which it is concealed, or by the
very naturalness to the human
mind of vice itself. Suppose
the person or society here spoken
of, to wake up on a sudden to a
consciousness of the holiness of
God and the requirements of his
law ; suppose further, they were
made aware of the contrast be
tween their own life and the
Divine rule, yet were powerless to
VER. 13, 14.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
215
13 ment holy, and just, and good ; was then that which is
good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that
it might appear sin, working death to* me by that
which is good ; that sin by the commandment might
14 become exceeding sinful. For we know that the law is
change, knowing everything, yet
able to accomplish nothing, sen
sitive to the pangs of conscience,
yet " unequal to the performance
of any duty ; " of such it might
be said, in a figure " Sin became
death that it might appear sin,
working death to us through that
which is good, that sin might be
come exceeding sinful."
Thus far in tracing the pro
gress of the spiritual conflict, the
Apostle has employed the aorist ;
at ver. 14. he introduces the
present. This has led some com
mentators, who agree in the view
that it is neither of the regene
rate nor of the unregenerate the
Apostle can be speaking exclu
sively, to suppose further that
the change of tense which he
here adopts, is an indication of
the transition from one to the
other. This change, however, is
more probably attributable to
liveliness of style ; at any rate,
it is sufficiently accounted for by
the greater reality which the
Apostle gives to the latter part
of his description.
The progress of which St. Paul
is speaking may be arranged in
six stages :
(1.) The state of nature: "I was
alive without the law once." ver. 9.
(2.) The awakening of nature
to the requirements of the law,
and the death of sin. ver. 9 11.
(3.) The growing consciousness
of right and severance of the
soul into two parts, as the sense
of right prevails, ver. 15 23.
(4.) Sin, which was originally
a mere perversion, strengthening
into a law which opposes itself
to the law of God. ver. 23, 24.
(5.) Laying aside of the worse
half of the soul, that is, justifica
tion, ver. 25.
(6.) Peace and glory, viii. 1.
It would be unlike the manner
of St. Paul to draw out these
stages in perfectly regular order.
Here, as elsewhere, he goes to
and fro, and returns upon his
former thought. In chapter viii.,
for example, when the soul has
already entered into its rest, he
again casts his eye upon the
believer s state from his earthly
side, " groaning within himself,
waiting for the redemption of the
body."
1423. In what follows the
Apostle deepens the opposition
between the law and self, or
(what is nearly the same) be
tween the better and the worse
self, as they belong to two orders
of things, and are of two natures,
the one spiritual, the other fleshly ;
the proof (yap) that man falls
under the latter being his very
distraction with self, which is a
witness to the truth of the law,
and which seems almost to trans
fer his actions from himself to
the sin which is personified in
him ; for (yap) this is the whole
man, nothing more of him re
maining, but the scarcely sur
viving will to do what is right.
v. 18 20. Both these princi
ples may be recognised under the
p 4
216
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. VII.
ei/u ireirpaiJievos VTTO Trjv a^apTiav. o yap KaTepyd- 15
ov yivaxTKO) ov yap o 0e\a), TOVTO TTpdcrcra), dXV o
O), TOVTO TTOtO). 1 C O OV 0.\0), TOVTO TTOlto, O~VfJL(f)rjfJiL 16
TW VO^CD OTI Ka\6s vvvl Se ovKtTi lya) KaTepyd^OfJiaL avTo, 17
dXXa TI OLKovcra iv IfJLol a^apTua. olSa yap OTI OVK otAcet is
iv cfjioi, TOVTZQ-TIV iv TTJ crapKi IJLOV, dya06.v. TO yap 0eXew
7rapdKLTai poi, TO Se KaTepyd&aOai, TO Ka\bv ov. 2 ov yap 19
1 (TO KlK.6$.
form of a law : the law of sin
dwelling in its fleshly seat, which
corresponds to the first of them ;
the law of God, which is the law
of the mind, which corresponds
to the latter.
14. For we know that there is
a contrariety between me and the
law the law is spiritual, I am
carnal, yap contains the proof
of the goodness of the law, and
also the reason for its being an
element of discord.
The language of the New Tes
tament does not conform to any
received views of psychology.
It is the language partly of the
Old Testament, but still more
of the Alexandrian philosophy,
which is defined neither by po
pular nor by scientific use. In
modern times we do not divide
the soul into its better and worse
half, but into will, reason, con
sciousness, and other faculties
which, for the most part, belong
equally to good and bad. Such
is, however, the fundamental di
vision of the Apostle. There is
a heavenly and earthly, a higher
and a lower principle ; the first,
whereby we hold communion
with God himself, the Spirit ; the
second, the flesh, or corrupt soil
of sin, scarcely distinguishable
from sin itself. These two do
not correspond to mind and body,
9 Add
which are only the figures under
which they are expressed.
15. o yap Ka.Tpyafi[j.ai, for
what I do.~\ Not, "I do not ap
prove what I do;" a meaning
which the word ytrwaKw does not
admit, but simply, "I know
not what I do." In the state of
which the Apostle is speaking,
the mind knows not, from very
distraction, what it does. It is
darkened as in the confusion of
a storm, or the din and cloud of
a battle. This is the proof that
he is sold under sin, a blind slave.
It may be argued that this ex
planation is inconsistent with
what follows. For in the next
clause it is not defect of know
ledge that is touched upon ; but
rather defect of power to do what
he desired, and therefore knew to
be right. Such an analysis is too
minute to catch the true spirit of
the Apostle. He is only present
ing successive images of the dis
traction of the soul, first, in not
knowing what it did ; secondly,
in doing what it would not. No
one would feel that there was
a contradiction if, in describing
a scene of hurry and confusion,
some one were to say,
not what I was about. 1
the very opposite of what I
tended."
is emphatic, as is seen by
"I knew
did
in-
. 1519.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
217
15 spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For what* I
do I know * not: for what I would, that do I not; but
16 what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would
17 not, I consent unto the law that it is good : and now *
it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
is For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth
no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how
19 to perform that which is good, 1 not. For the good that
1 Add I
its opposition to po-w in the fol
lowing clause; not what I will,
but what I wish. The Apostle
is describing a state, not in which
the better mind is passive and
the worse mind active, but in
which they are both together
active; in which for every bad
act which a man does, conscience
rebukes him and makes him feel
that it has a pain equal to its
pleasures. For illustration of
such a state comp. Xenoph. Cyr.
vi. 1.: Avo yctp aatyGjg %w I^W^CLQ
ov yap (Hi} pia ye ouaa. apa ayuOfj
re effTi KO.I KaKri, ov<T a.fj.a KaXwv re
Koi atV)(jOWj> epywj cpp, KCU raura
afjia (3ov\erai re KO.I ov fiovXerat :
also the aKparijQ of Aristotle s
Ethics, and the fine figure of the
soul being like the palsied limbs,
in the first book ; and Plato, Rep.
iv. p. 43.
16. This very unwillingness to
do wrong is a witness to the law.
The law, it is true, is the occa
sion of sin ; and yet this very sin
done against the admonitions of
the law, is a witness to that which
occasioned it. The law made me
sin and made me acknowledge
the sin at once.
17. vvv\ 3f, and now.~\ That
is, considering this, I may fairly
say it is no more I that do it, but
sin that dwelleth in me. First
came the state of death, that is,
of absolute discord; secondly,
the consciousness of this ; thirdly,
a dim light of salvation springs
up from the sense that it is not
ourselves, but the infirmity of sin
that does the evil. It is not I
that do it; but sin, my master,
takes up his abode with me, and
carries me whither I would not.
In this passage, between ver.
14. and 25., the Apostle may be
said three times to change his
identity : First of all, he is one
with his worse nature, which,
as having the power to turn the
balance of his actions, claims to
be the whole man ; secondly, with
his better nature, which makes
a perceptible though ineffectual
struggle against the power of evil;
and, thirdly, he separates himself
from both, and overlooks the
strife between them, ver. 21 23.
18. Here is a further change
in the personality of the speaker :
"I know that in me," which is
explained to mean "in my flesh,"
there is, as it were standing by
my side, the wish for the good,
but not the accomplishment of the
good, ovx evpio-Kw, the reading of
the Text. Recep.and of A. G. f. g.
v., if genuine, is a continuation of
the figure of TrapaK-eirai; cf. ver. 21.
19, 20. A repetition, with
218
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[OH. VII.
o #eXo) TTOLO) dya96v, dXX o ov 0e\a> KO.KOV, TOVTO Trpdcrcra).
ei Se o ov
, TOVTO TTOLO), OVKCTL ya)
20
avro, dXX Tf oiKovcra eV e/iot d^apria. evpicrKO) dpa TOV 21
TCp 9t\OVTl IfJLOL TTOIZW TO KOL\6v, OTL IfJiol TO KOLKOV
crwTySojutai yap TW v6p,<$ TOV deov Kara TOV 22
ecro) dv9pb)7rov, /3\7ro) Se eTepov vopov eV rois /xeXecrc^ p.ov 23
dvTLO TpaTv6lJLVOV TG> VO^O) TOV VOOS {JiOV K.OLI
tpvTa fJie TO) vofico TTJs dpapTias TCO OVTI iv rots
fjiov. Ta\aL7ra)pos eya> dv9pa)7ros ri? /xe pvo~eTai IK TOV 24
slightly altered phraseology, of
15, 16., "If I do it not;" it is
now said, not I agree to the
law that it is good but "sin
that dwelleth in me doeth it."
Compare Gal. ii. 20. for a simi
lar personification.
21. The various interpretations
of this verse, accordingly as on
is rendered by " that " or " be
cause," may be divided into two
classes. First, with 6 rt, in the
sense of because : " I find out, or
am made conscious of the law,
because evil is present with me."
The thought thus elicited is not
unlike the manner of St. Paul,
but the use of evp/o-^w is indefen
sible. We are thus driven to
the other interpretation of on,
" that ; " the clause dependent on
which may be explained in two
ways : either, "I find then when
I desire to do well, that the law as
the evil is present with me ; " or,
what seems better and more in
accordance with the words ro
3-fXeiv TrajOctfceiT-at in the eigh
teenth verse, "I find then the
law (like the law in the members
below) that when I desire to do
well, evil is present with me."
The slight play in the expression
is analogous to the vo/ioc rrjc;
in the third chapter, and
the vofjioQ T% a^uapr/ac in the
eighth.
22. For if I may make a dis
tinction in myself of the inner
man and outer man (compare 1
Pet. iii. 4. : 6 KPVTTTOQ rfjg fcapcu ctc
tivdpioTTOQ. Eph. iii. 16. : fcparcu-
wQrjvat c)ta TOV TrvevparoQ avrov
etg rov effu) a 0|OW7roy), "in my
heart of hearts" I rejoice in the
law of God. Withdraw man
from the flesh, from the passions
and their objects, and there is
something within which acknow
ledges the supremacy of right,
whether we term it reason, or
the inner man, or the true self.
No one loves evil for its own sake.
avvriSofjiat, according to Hesy-
chius, is sometimes put for (/ /-
Soften: the case which follows
is also said by grammarians to be
governed of the verb, not of
the preposition. It is more
natural to suppose a double
construction, avv expressing con
sciousness, as in crvvoiSa, (TVJJL-
fjiaprvpu) : " Conscious of the law
I delight in it."
23. In the short space between
the twenty-first and the twenty-
this death which clings to me as
a body ?
VER. 20 24.] EPISTLE TO THE EOMANS.
219
I would I do not : but the evil which I would not, that
20 I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that
21 do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then the*
law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 but I see another law in my members, warring against
the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to
24 the law of sin which is in my members. wretched
man that I am ! who shall deliver me from the body of
third verses there occur five mo
difications of the word VO^JLOQ :
(1.) The play of words alluded
to above, " the law that evil is
present with him." (2.) The
law of God, that is, the law of
Moses " in the Spirit," not " in
the letter ; " or, as we might ex
press it, "idealised." (3.) The
same law presented under a dif
ferent aspect, as VOJJLOQ TOV rooQ,
or conscience. (4.) VOJJLOQ iv
(5.) ro/j.oQ rJ/e ct^uap-
Borrowing the language
of philosophical distinctions, we
may arrange them as follows :
Subject.
TOV VOOQ.
kv TOIQ J,
Object.
VOfJ-OQ TOV $OV.
VOJJLOQ TIJQ apapriag.
See on ver. 7.
The 23rd verse describes a fur
ther progress in the conflict. At
first the two " laws " are opposed
to each other ; but at length the
worse " law " gets the better, and
the soul passes on to consider
evil as a sort of internal neces
sity to which it is by nature li
able. The eTepog j ojuoc is only
distinguished from the VOJJLOQ riJQ
ttjuajorme, as the wavering emo
tion of the will from the settled
inward principle. The first is
the temptation of the natural
desires ; the second, the law of
despair.
The Gospel is often opposed
to the law, as the inward to the
outward. Here the law of sin
is equally figured as internal ;
though within, that is, in the
flesh and the members, it is still
incapable of harmonising with
our better life. We might il
lustrate its relation to the soul,
by the example of those poisons
whose introduction into the body
is said to destroy life because
they never become a part of the
human frame.
.] For the figure
compare TreTrpapevoQ, ver. 16.
24. At last we arrive at the
crisis : " O wretched man that
I am ! who shall deliver me from
the body of this death ? " Of the
last words, TOV (T^)^JLUTOQ TOV Sava-
TOV TOVTOV ; no less than four ex
planations may be given :
(1.) Who will deliver me from
this mortal body ? or,
(2.) Who will deliver me from
this mass of death ? or,
(3.) Who will deliver me from
this frame or structure of death,
of which, as it were, my mem
bers are parts ? or,
(4.) Who will deliver me from
220
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
H. VII.
SovXeuw
TOV Oavarov TOVTOV ; ^
TOV KvpLov rjjjiwv. apa ovv avros eya> rw
deov, rfj Se (rapid
25
No. 1. is ill suited to the con
nexion; (2.) o-w/ia does not mean
a mass ; (3.) the idea of the mem
bers which occurs in the previous
verse may possibly be included ;
(4.) is most in accordance with
the style of St. Paul. As in
Rom. vi. 6. sin, so here death is
itself the body, death in this pas
sage being nothing more than the
last stage of sin. The two ex
pressions " body of sin," " body
of death," may be regarded as
precisely parallel. A remote al
lusion is probably intended to the
words t v rolg fji\(riV) which pre
cede. This, however, should not
be taken as if the body consisted
of the members. For while it is
natural to speak as in 1 Cor. vi.
15. of the members of the body
of Christ, it is not so to speak of
the members of " the body of
death."
25. x"! ^ T $ $$"] A great
variety of readings occur at these
words, which have probably arisen
from the difficulty of explaining
the text as it stands in the best
manuscripts. We are expecting
an answer to ver. 24., and the
Apostle gives no other answer
but such as is implied in the
doxology itself. " Thanks be to
God through Jesus Christ our
Lord."
VEE. 25.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
221
25 this death? Thanks be to God 1 through Jesus Christ
our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the
law of God; howbeit with the flesh the law of sin.
1 I thank God.
This is one of the many pas
sages in the Apostle s writings,
which lead us to conclude that
he dictated rather than himself
wrote. Such a slip in the con
struction could hardly have oc
curred to any one with the writ
ten page before him.
ap ovv~\ contains the summing
up of the whole previous passage.
avroQ eyw] has been variously
explained: either (1.) I by my
self or I in my unaided state ; or
(2.) I myself as well as others,
both of which are inconsistent
with the connexion ; or (3.), I,
the same person, which is con
trary to the language, and would
require eyw 6 avrnc ; or, lastly
(4), as seems best, I, "myself,"
that is, " in my true self," serve
the law of God ; the remainder
of the sentence may be regarded
as an afterthought, in which the
Apostle checks his aspiration, <)
being exactly expressed in En
glish by " howbeit." Compare
ver. 8. : atyoppiv SI Xa/Bovo-a. This
is not the grammatical form of
the sentence, in which, of course,
Se answers to per. That it is the
order of the thought, however, is
inferred, from the difficulty in
connecting the words rij St trap/a
J Oftw dpapriaQ either with avrog
w or with what follows.
222 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
ON CONVEKSION AND CHANGES OF
CHAKACTEK.
THUS have we the image of the life-long struggle gathered up in a
single instant. In describing it we pass beyond the consciousness of
the individual into a world of abstractions ; we loosen the thread by
which the spiritual faculties are held together, and view as objects
what can, strictly speaking, have no existence, except in relation to
the subject. The divided members of the soul are ideal, the combat
between them is ideal, so also is the victory. What is real that cor
responds to this, is not a momentary, but a continuous conflict, which
we feel rather than know, which has its different aspects of hope
and fear, triumph and despair, the action and reaction of the Spirit
of God in the depths of the human soul, awakening the sense of sin
and conveying the assurance of forgiveness.
The language in which we describe this conflict is very dif
ferent from that of the Apostle. Our circumstances are so
changed that we are hardly able to view it in its simplest elements.
Christianity is now the established religion of the civilised portion
of mankind. In our own country it has become part of the law of
the land ; it speaks with authority, it is embodied in a Church, it is
supported by almost universal opinion, and fortified by wealth and
prescription. Those who know least of its spiritual life, do not deny
its greatness as a power in the world. Analogous to this relation
in which it stands to our history and social state, is the relation in
which it stands also to the minds of individuals. We are brought
up in it, and unconsciously receive it as the habit of our thoughts
and the condition of our life. It is without us, and we are within its
circle ; we do not become Christians, we are so from our birth. Even
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER 223
in those who suppose themselves to have passed through some sudden
and violent change, and to have tasted once for all of the heavenly
gift, the change is hardly ever in the form or substance of their
belief, but in its quickening power ; they feel not a new creed, but a
new spirit within them. So that we might truly say of Christianity,
that it is " the daughter of time ; " it hangs to the past, not only
because the first century is the era of its birth, but because each suc
cessive century strengthens its form and adds to its external force,
and entwines it with more numerous links in our social state. Not
only may we say, that it is part and parcel of the law of the land,
but part and parcel of the character of each one, which even the worst
of men cannot wholly shake off.
But if with ourselves the influence of Christianity is almost
always gradual and imperceptible, with the first believers it was
almost always sudden. There was no interval which separated the
preaching of Peter on the day of Pentecost, from the baptism of the
three thousand. The eunuch of Candace paused for a brief space on
a journey, and was then baptized into the name of Christ, which a few
hours previously he had not so much as heard. There was no period
of probation like that which, a century or two later, was appropriated
to the instruction of the Catechumens. It was an impulse, an inspi
ration passing from the lips of one to a chosen few, and communicated
by them to the ear and soul of listening multitudes. As the wind
bloweth where it listeth, and we hear the sounds thereof; as the
lightning shineth from the one end of the heaven to the other ; so
suddenly, fitfully, simultaneously, new thoughts come into their
minds, not to one only, but to many, to whole cities almost at once.
They were pricked with the sense of sin ; they were melted with the
love of Christ ; their spiritual nature " came again like the flesh of a
little child." And some, like St. Paul, became the very opposite of
their former selves ; from scoffers, believers ; from persecutors,
preachers ; the thing that they were, was so strange to them, that they
could no longer look calmly on the earthly scene which they hardly
seemed to touch, which was already lighted up with the wrath and
224 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
mercy of God. There were those among them who "saw visions
and dreamed dreams," who were " caught up," like St. Paul, " into
the third heaven," or, like the twelve, "spake with other tongues as the
Spirit gave them utterance." And sometimes, as in the Thessalonian
Church, the ecstasy of conversion led to strange and wild opinions,
such as the daily expectation of Christ s coming. The " round world "
itself began to reel before them, as they thought of the things that
were shortly to come to pass.
But however sudden were the conversions of the earliest believers,
however wonderful the circumstances which attended them, they were
not for that reason the less lasting or sincere. Though many preached
" Christ of contention," though " Demas forsook the Apostle," there
were few who, having once taken up the cross, turned back from
" the love of this present world." They might waver between Paul
and Peter, between the circumcision and the uncircumcision ; they
might give ear to the strange and bewitching heresies of the East ;
but there is no trace that many returned to " those that were no
gods," or put off Christ ; the impression of the truth that they had
received, was everlasting on their minds. Even sins of fornication
and uncleanness, which from the Apostle s frequent warnings against
them we must suppose to have lingered, as a sort of remnant of
heathenism in the early Church, did not wholly destroy their inward
relation to God and Christ. Though " their last state might be worse
than the first," they could never return again to live the life of all
men after having tasted " the heavenly gift and the powers of the
world to come."
Such was the nature of conversion among the early Christians,
the new birth of which by spiritual descent we are ourselves the
offspring. Is there anything in history like it ? anything in our own
lives which may help us to understand it ? That which the Scripture
describes from within, we are for a while going to look at from a
different point of view, not with reference to the power of God, but
to those secondary causes through which He works, the laws which
experience shows that he himself imposes on the operations of his
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 225
spirit. Such an inquiry is not a mere idle speculation ; it is not
far from the practical question, "How we are to become better."
Imperfect as any attempt to analyse our spiritual life must ever be,
the changes which we ourselves experience or observe in others,
compared with those greater and more sudden changes which took
place in the age of the Apostle, will throw light upon each other.
In the sudden conversions of the early Christians we observe
three things which either tend to discredit, or do not accompany, the
working of a similar power among ourselves. First, that conversion
was marked by ecstatic and unusual phenomena; secondly, that,
though sudden, it was permanent ; thirdly, that it fell upon whole
multitudes at once.
When we consider what is implied in such expressions as " not many
wise, not many learned" were called to the knowledge of the truth, we
can scarcely avoid feeling that there must have been much in the
early Church which would have been distasteful to us as men of edu
cation ; much that must have worn the appearance of excitement and
enthusiasm. Is the mean conventicle, looking almost like a private
house, a better image of that first assembly of Christians which met
in the " large upper room," or the Catholic church arrayed in all the
glories of Christian art ? Neither of them is altogether like in spirit
perhaps, but in externals the first. Is the dignified hierarchy that
occupy the seats around the altar, more like the multitudes of first
believers, or the lowly crowd that kneel upon the pavement ? If
we try to embody in the mind s eye the forms of the first teachers,
and still more of their followers, we cannot help reading the true
lesson, however great may be the illusions of poetry or of art. Not
St. Paul standing on Mars hill in the fulness of manly strength, as
we have him in the cartoon of Raphael, is the true image ; but such
a one as he himself would glory in, whose bodily presence was weak
and speech feeble, who had an infirmity in his flesh, and bore in his
body the marks of the Lord Jesus.
And when we look at this picture, " full in the face," however we
might by nature be inclined to turn aside from it, or veil its details
VOL. II. Q
226 EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
in general language, we cannot deny that many things that accom
pany the religion of the uneducated now, must then also have accom
panied the Gospel preached to the poor. There must have been,
humanly speaking, spiritual delusions where men lived so exclusively
in the spiritual world ; there were scenes which we know took place
such as St. Paul says would make the unbeliever think that they
were mad. The best and holiest persons among the poor and ignorant
are not entirely free from superstition, according to the notions of the
educated ; at best they are apt to speak of religion in a manner not
quite suited to our taste ; they sing with a loud and excited voice ;
they imagine themselves to receive Divine oracles, even about the
humblest cares of life. Is not this, in externals at least, very like the
appearance which the first disciples must have presented, who obeyed
the Apostle s injunction, " Is any sad ? let him pray ; is any merry ?
let him sing psalms " ? Could our nerves have borne to witness the
speaking with tongues, or the administration of Baptism, or the
love feasts as they probably existed in the early Church ?
This difference between the feelings and habits of the first Chris
tians and ourselves, must be borne in mind in relation to the subject
of conversion. For as sudden changes are more likely to be met
with amongst the poor and uneducated in the present day, it certainly
throws light on the subject of the first conversions, that to the poor
and uneducated the Gospel was first preached. And yet these sud
den changes were as real, nay, more real than any gradual changes
which take place among ourselves. The Stoic or Epicurean philoso
pher who had come into an assembly of believers speaking with
tongues, would have remarked, that among the vulgar religious
extravagances were usually short-lived. But it was not so. There
was more there than he had eyes to see, or than was dreamed of
in a philosophy like his. Not only was there the superficial ap
pearance of poverty and meanness and enthusiasm, from a nearer
view of which we are apt to shrink, but underneath this, brighter
from its very obscurity, purer from the meanness of the raiment in
which it was apparalled, was the life hidden with Christ and God.
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 227
There, and there only, was the power which made a man humble
instead of proud, self-denying instead of self-seeking, spiritual instead
of carnal, a Christian instead of a Jew ; which made him embrace,
not only the brethren, but the whole human race in the arms of his
love.
But it is a further difference between the power of the Gospel
now and in the first ages, that it no longer converts whole multitudes
at once. Perhaps this very individuality in its mode of working
may not be without an advantage in awakening us to its higher
truths and more entire spiritual freedom. Whether this be so or
not ; whether there be any spiritual law by which reason, in a measure,
takes the place of faith, and the common religious impulse weakens
as the power of reflection grows, we certainly observe a diminution
in the collective force which religion exercises on the hearts of men.
In our own days the preacher sees the seed which he has sown gra
dually spring up ; first one, then another begins to lead a better life ;
then a change comes over the state of society, often from causes over
which he has no control ; he makes some steps forwards and a few
backwards, and trusts far more, if he is wise, to the silent influence
of religious education than to the power of preaching ; and, perhaps,
the result of a long life of ministerial labour is far less than that of a
single discourse from the lips of the Apostles or their followers.
Even in missions to the heathen the vital energies of Christianity
cease to operate to any great extent, at least on the effete civilisation
of India and China ; the limits of the kingdoms of light and darkness
are nearly the same as heretofore. At any rate it cannot be said
that Christianity has wrought any sudden amelioration of mankind
by the immediate preaching of the word, since the conversion of the
barbarians. Even within the Christian world there is a parallel
retardation. The ebb and flow of reformation and counter-reforma
tion have hardly changed the permanent landmarks. The age of spi
ritual crises is past. The growth of Christianity in modern times may
be compared to the change of the body, when it has already arrived at
its full stature. In one half-century so vast a progress was made, in
Q 2
228 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
a few centuries more the world itself seemed to " have gone after
Him," and now for near a thousand years the voice of experience is
repeating to us, " Hitherto shalt thou go, but no further."
Looking at this remarkable phenomenon of the conversion of whole
multitudes at once, not from its Divine but from its human aspect
(that is, with reference to that provision that God himself has made in
human nature for the execution of his will), the first cause to which
we are naturally led to attribute it, is the power of sympathy. Why
it is that men ever act together is a mystery of which our individual
self- consciousness gives no account, any more than why we speak a
common language, or form nations or societies, or merely in our phy
sical nature are capable of taking diseases from one another. Nature
and the Author of nature have made us thus dependent on each other
both in body and soul. Whoever has seen human beings collected
together in masses, and watched the movements that pass over them,
like " the trees of the forest moving in the wind," will have no diffi
culty in imagining, if not in understanding, how the same voice might
have found its way at the same instant to a thousand hearts, without
our being able to say where the fire was first kindled, or by whom
the inspiration was first caught. Such historical events as the
Reformation, or the Crusades, or the French Revolution, are a suffi
cient evidence that a whole people, or almost, we may say, half a
world, may be " drunk into one spirit," springing up, as it might
seem, spontaneously in the breast of each, yet common to all. A
parallel yet nearer is furnished by the history of the Jewish people,
in whose sudden rebellion and restoration to God s favour, we recog
nise literally the momentary workings of, what is to ourselves a figure
of speech, a national conscience.
In ordinary cases we should truly say that there must have been
some predisposing cause of a great political or religious revolution ;
some latent elements acting alike upon all, which, though long smoul
dering beneath, burst forth at last into a flame. Such a cause might
be the misery of mankind, or the intense corruption of human society,
which could not be quickened except it die, or the long-suppressed
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 229
yearnings of the soul after something higher than it had hitherto
known upon earth, or the reflected light of one religion or one move
ment of the human mind upon another. Such causes were actually
at work, preparing the way for the diffusion of Christianity. The
law itself was beginning to pass away in an altered world, the state
of society was hollow, the chosen people were hopelessly under the
Roman yoke. Good men refrained from the wild attempt of the Gali
lean Judas ; yet the spirit which animated such attempts was slum
bering in their bosoms. Looking back at their own past history, they
could not but remember, even in an altered world, that there was One
who ruled among the kingdoms of men, " beside whom there was no
God." Were they to suppose that His arm was straitened to save ?
that He had forgotten His tender mercies to the house of David ? that
the aspirations of the prophets were vain ? that the blood of the Mac-
cabean heroes had sunk like water into the earth ? This was a hard
saying ; who could bear it ? It was long ere the nation, like the indi
vidual, put off the old man that is, the temporal dispensation and
put on the new man that is, the spiritual Israel. The very misery of
the people seemed to forbid them to acquiesce in their present state.
And with the miserable condition of the nation sprang up also the feel
ing, not only in individuals but in the race, that for their sins they were
chastened, the feeling which their whole history seemed to deepen
and increase. At last the scales fell from their eyes ; the veil that was
on the face of Moses was first transfigured before them, then removed ;
the thoughts of many hearts turned simultaneously to the Hope of
Israel, " Him whom the law and the prophets foretold." As they
listened to the preaching of the Apostles, they seemed to hear a truth
both new and old ; what many had thought, but none had uttered ;
which in its comfort and joyousness seemed to them new, and yet,
from its familiarity and suitableness to their condition, not the less
old.
Spiritual life, no less than natural life, is often the very opposite of
the elements which seem to give birth to it. The preparation for the
Q 3
230 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
way of the Lord, which John the Baptist preached, did not consist in
a direct reference to the Saviour. The words "He shall baptize you
with the Holy Ghost and with fire," and "He shall burn up the chaff
with fire unquenchable," could have given the Jews no exact concep
tion of Him who "did not break the bruised reed, nor quench the
smoking flax." It was in another way that John prepared for Christ,
by quickening the moral sense of the people, and sounding in their
ears the voice "Eepent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
Beyond this useful lesson, there was a kind of vacancy in the preach
ing of John. He himself, as "he was finishing his course," testified
that his work was incomplete, and that he was not the Christ. The
Jewish people were prepared by his preaching for the coming of
Christ, just as an individual might be prepared to receive Him by the
conviction of sin and the conscious need of forgiveness.
Except from the Gospel history and the writings of Josephus and
Philo, we know but little of the tendencies of the Jewish mind in the
time of our Lord. Yet we cannot doubt that the entrance of Chris
tianity into the world was not sudden and abrupt; that is, an illusion
which arises in the mind from our slender acquaintance with con
temporary opinions. Better and higher and holier as it was, it was
not absolutely distinct from the teaching of the doctors of the law
either in form or substance ; it was not unconnected with, but gave
life and truth to, the mystic fancies of Alexandrian philosophy. Even
in the counsels of perfection of the Sermon on the Mount, there is
probably nothing which might not be found, either in letter or
spirit, in Philo or some other Jewish or Eastern writer. The pecu
liarity of the Gospel is, not that it teaches what is wholly new,
but that it draws out of the treasure-house of the human heart
things new and old, gathering together in one the dispersed fragments
of the truth. The common people would not have "heard Him
gladly," but for the truth of what He said. The heart was its own
witness to it. The better nature of man, though but for a moment,
responded to it, spoken as it was with authority, and not as the
scribes j with simplicity, and not as the great teachers of the law ;
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 231
and sanctified by the life and actions of Him from whose lips it came,
and "Who spake as never man spake."
And yet, after reviewing the circumstances of the first preaching
of the Gospel, there remains something which cannot be resolved
into causes or antecedents ; which eludes criticism, and can no more
be explained in the world than the sudden changes of character in the
individual. There are processes of life and organisation about which
we know nothing, and we seem to know that we shall never know
anything. "That which thou sowest is not quickened, except it
die ; " but the mechanism of this new life is too complex, and yet
too simple for us to untwist its fibres. The figure which St. Paul
applies to the resurrection of the body, is true also of the renewal of
the soul, especially in the first ages of which we know so little, and
in which the Gospel seems to have acted with such far greater
power than among ourselves."
Leaving further inquiry into the conversion of the first Christians
at the point at which it hides itself from us in mystery, we have
now to turn to a question hardly less mysterious, though seemingly
more familiar to us, which may be regarded as a question either of
moral philosophy or of theology, the nature of conversion and
changes of character among ourselves. What traces are there of a
spiritual power still acting upon the human heart? What is the
inward nature, and what are the outward conditions of changes in
human conduct ? Is our life a gradual and insensible progress from
infancy to age, from birth to death, governed by fixed laws ; or is it
a miracle and mystery of thirty, or fifty, or seventy years standing,
consisting of so many isolated actions or portions knit together by
no common principle ?
Were we to consider mankind only from without, there could be
no doubt of the answer which we should give to the last of these
questions. The order of the world would scarcely even seem to be
infringed by the free will of man. In morals, no less than in physics,
everything would appear to proceed by regular law. Individuals
have certain capacities, which grow with their growth and strengthen
Q 4
232 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
with their strength ; and no one by taking thought can add one cubit
to his stature. As the poet says : " The boy is father to the man."
The lives of the great majority have a sort of continuity : as we
know them by the same look, walk, manner ; so when we come to
converse with them, we recognise the same character as formerly.
They may be changed ; but the change in general is such as we ex
pect to find in them from youth to maturity, or from maturity to
decay. There is something in them which is not changed, by which
we perceive them to be the same. If they were weak, they remain
so still ; if they were sensitive, they remain so still ; if they were
selfish or passionate, such faults are seldom cured by increasing
age or infirmities. And often the same nature puts on many
veils and disguises ; to the outward eye it may have, in some instances,
almost disappeared ; when we look beneath, it is still there.
The appearance of this sameness in human nature has led many
to suppose that no real change ever takes place. Does a man from a
drunkard become sober ? from a knight errant become a devotee ?
from a sensualist a believer in Christ ? or a woman from a life of
pleasure pass to a romantic and devoted religion ? It has been main
tained that they are the same still ; and that deeper similarities re
main than the differences which are a part of their new profession.
Those who make the remark would say, that such persons exhibit
the same vanity, the same irritability, the same ambition ; that sen -
sualism still lurks under the disguise of refinement, or earthly and
human passion transfuses itself into devotion.
This " practical fatalism," which says that human beings can be
what they are and nothing else, has a certain degree of truth, or
rather, of plausibility, from the circumstance that men seldom change
wholly, and that the part of their nature which changes least is the
weakness and infirmity that shows itself on the surface. Few, com
paratively, ever change their outward manner, except from the mere
result of altered circumstances ; and hence, to a superficial observer,
they appear to change less than is really the fact. Probably, St.
Paul never lost that trembling and feebleness which was one of the
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 233
trials of his life. Nor, in so far as the mind is dependent on the
body, can we pretend to be wholly free agents. Who can say that
his view of life and his power of action are unaffected by his bodily
state ? or who expects to find a firm and decided character in the
nervous and sensitive frame? The commonest facts of daily life
sufficiently prove the connexion of mind and body ; the more we
attend to it the closer it appears. Nor, indeed, can it be denied that
external circumstances fix for most men the path of life. They are
the inhabitants of a particular country ; they have a certain position
in the world ; they rise to their occupations as the morning comes
round ; they seldom get beyond the circle of ideas in which they have
been brought up. Fearfully and wonderfully as they are made,
though each one in his bodily frame, and even more in his thoughts
and feelings, is a miracle of complexity, they seem, as they meet in
society, to reunite into a machine, and society itself is the great
automaton of which they are the parts. It is harder and more con
ventional than the individuals which compose it ; it exercises a kind
of regulating force on the wayward fancies of their wills ; it says to
them in an unmistakable manner that " they shall not break their
ranks." The laws of trade, the customs of social life, the instincts of
human nature, act upon us with a power little less than that of
physical necessity.
If from this external aspect of human things, we turn inward,
there seems to be no limit to the changes which we deem possible.
We are no longer the same, but different every hour. No physical
fact interposes itself as an obstacle to our thoughts any more than to
our dreams. The world and its laws have nothing to do with our
free determinations. At any moment we can begin a new life ; in
idea at least, no time is required for the change. One instant we
may be proud, the next humble ; one instant sinning, at the next
repenting ; one instant, like St. Paul, ready to persecute, at another
to preach the Gospel ; full of malice and hatred one hour, melting
into tenderness the next. As we hear the words of the preacher,
there is a voice within telling us, that " now, even now, is the day
234 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
of salvation ; " and if certain clogs and hindrances of earth could
only be removed, we are ready to pass immediately into another state.
And, at times, it seems as though we had actually passed into rest,
and had a foretaste of the heavenly gift. Something more than
imagination enables us to fashion a divine pattern to which we con
form for a little while. The " new man " unto which we become
transformed, is so pleasant to us that it banishes the thought of
" the old." In youth especially, when we are ignorant of the com
pass of our own nature, such frames of mind are perpetually recur
ring ; perhaps, not without attendant evils ; certainly, also, for good.
But besides such feelings as these, which we know to be partly
true, partly illusive, every one s experience of himself appears to
teach him, that he has gone through many changes and had many
special providences vouchsafed to him ; he says to himself that he has
been led in a mysterious and peculiar way, not like the way of other
men, and had feelings not common to others ; he compares different
times and places, and contrasts his own conduct here and there, now
and then. In other men he remarks similarity of character ; in him
self he sees chiefly diversity. They seem to be the creatures of
habit and circumstance ; he alone is a free agent. The truth is, that
he observes himself; he cannot equally observe them. He is not
conscious of the inward struggles through which they have passed ;
he sees only the veil of flesh which conceals them from his view.
He knows when he thinks about it, but he does not habitually re
member, that, under that calm exterior, there is a like current of in
dividual thoughts, feelings, interests, which have as great a charm
and intensity for another as the workings of his own mind have for
himself.
And yet it does not follow, that this inward fact is to be set aside
as the result of egotism and illusion. It may be not merely the
dreamy reflection of our life and actions in the mirror of self, but the
subtle and delicate spring of the whole machine. To purify the
feelings or to move the will, the internal sense may be as necessary to
us as external observation is to regulate and sustain them. Even to
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 235
the formula of the fatalist, that " freedom is the consciousness of
necessity," it may be replied, that that very consciousness, as he terms
it, is as essential as any other link in the chain in which " he binds
fast the world." Human nature is beset by the contradiction, not
of two rival theories, but of many apparently contradictory facts.
If we cannot imagine how the world could go on without law and
order in human actions, neither can we imagine how morality could
subsist unless we clear a space around us for the freedom of the will.
But not in this place to get further into the meshes of the great
question of freedom and necessity, let us rather turn aside for a mo
ment to consider some practical aspects of the reflections which
precede. Scripture and reason alike require that we should entirely
turn to God, that we should obey the whole law. And hard as this
may seem at first, there is a witness within us which pleads that it is
possible. Our mind and moral nature are one ; we cannot break our
selves into pieces in action any more than in thought. The whole
man is in every part and in every act. This is not a mere mode of
thought, but a truth of great practical importance. "Easier to
change many things than one," is the common saying. Easier, we
may add, in religion or morality, to change the whole than the part.
Easier because more natural, more agreeable to the voice of con
science and the promises of Scripture. God himself deals with
us as a whole ; he does not forgive us in part any more than he
requires us to serve Him in part. It may be true that, of the thousand
hearers of the appeal of the preacher, not above one begins a new
life. And some persons will imagine that it might be better to make
an impression on them little by little, like the effect of the dropping
of water upon stone. Not in this way is the Gospel written down on
the fleshly tables of the heart. More true to our own experience of self,
as well as to the words of Scripture, are such ideas as renovation,
renewal, regeneration, taking up the cross and following Christ,
dying with Christ that we may also live with him.
Many a person will teaze himself by counting minutes and pro
viding small rules for his life, who would have found the task an
236 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
easier and a nobler one, had he viewed it in its whole extent, and
gone to God in a " large and liberal spirit," to offer up his life to
Him. To have no " arriere pensee" in the service of God and virtue
is the great source of peace and happiness. Make clean that which
is within, and you have no need to purify that which is without.
Take care of the little things of life, and the great ones will take care
of themselves, is the maxim of the trader, which is sometimes, and
with a certain degree of truth, applied to the service of God. But
much more true is it in religion that we should take care of the
great things, and the trifles of life will take care of themselves. "If
thine eye be single, thy whole body will be full of light." Christi
anity is not acquired as an art by long practice ; it does not carve
and polish human nature with a graving tool ; it makes the whole
man ; first pouring out his soul before God, and then " casting him in
a mould." Its workings are not to be measured by time, even though
among educated persons, and in modern times, sudden and momen
tary conversions can rarely occur.
For the doctrine of conversion, the moralist substitutes the theory
of habits. Good actions, he says, produce good habits; and the
repetition of good actions makes them easier to perform, and " for
tifies us indefinitely against temptation." There are bodily and
mental habits habits of reflection and habits of action. Practice
gives skill or sleight of hand ; constant attention, the faculty of abs
traction ; so the practice of virtue makes us virtuous, that of vice,
vicious. The more meat we eat, to use the illustration of Aristotle,
in whom we find a cruder form of the same theory, the more we are
able to eat meat ; the more we wrestle, the more able we are to
wrestle, and so forth. If a person has some duty to perform, say of
common and trivial sort, to rise at a particular hour in the morning,
to be at a particular place at such an hour, to conform to some rule
about abstinence, we tell him that he will find the first occasion
difficult, the second easy, and the difficulty is supposed to vanish by
degrees until it wholly disappears. If a man has to march into a
battle, or to perform a surgical operation, or to do anything else
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 237
from which human nature shrinks, his nerves, we say, are gradually
strengthened ; his head, as was said of a famous soldier, clears up at
the sound of the cannon ; like the grave-digger in Hamlet, he has
soon no " feeling of his occupation."
From a consideration of such instances as these, the rule has been
laid down, that, " as the passive impression weakens, the active habit
strengthens." But is not this saying of a great man founded on
a narrow and partial contemplation of human nature ? For, in
the first place, it leaves altogether out of sight the motives of
human action ; it is equally suited to the most rigid formal
ist, and to a moral and spiritual being. Secondly, it takes no
account of the limitation of the power of habits, which neither in
mind nor body can be extended beyond a certain point ; nor of the
original capacity or peculiar character of individuals ; nor of the
different kinds of habits, nor of the degrees of strength and weakness
in different minds; nor of the enormous difference between youth and
age, childhood and manhood, in the capacity for acquiring habits.
Old age does not move with accumulated force, either upwards
or downwards ; they are the lesser habits, not the great springs
of life, that show themselves in it with increased power. Nor can
the man who has neglected to form habits in youth, acquire them in
mature life ; like the body, the mind ceases to be capable of receiving
a particular form. Lastly, such a description of human nature agrees
with no man s account of himself; whatever moralists may say, he
knows himself to be a spiritual being. " The wind bloweth where it
listeth," and he cannot " tell whence it cometh, or whither it goeth."
All that is true in the theory of habits seems to be implied in the
notion of order or regularity. Even this is inadequate to give a
conception of the structure of human beings. Order is the beginning,
but freedom is the perfection of our moral nature. Men do not live
at random, or act one instant without reference to their actions just
before. And in youth especially, the very sameness of our occupa
tions is a sort of stay and support to us, as in age it may be described
as a kind of rest. But no one will say that the mere repetition of ac-
238 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
tions until they constitute a habit, gives any explanation of the higher
and nobler forms of human virtue, or the finer moulds of character.
Life cannot be explained as the working of a mere machine, still
less can moral or spiritual life be reduced to merely mechanical
laws.
But if, while acknowledging that a great proportion of mankind
are the creatures of habit, and that a great part of our actions are
nothing more than the result of habit, we go on to ask ourselves about
the changes of our life, and fix our minds on the critical points, we
are led to view human nature, not only in a wider and more generous
spirit, but also in a way more accordant with the language of
Scripture. We no longer measure ourselves by days or by weeks ;
we are conscious that at particular times we have undergone great
revolutions or emotions ; and then, again, have intervened periods,
lasting perhaps for years, in which we have pursued the even current
of our way. Our progress towards good may have been in idea an
imperceptible and regular advance ; in fact, we know it to have been
otherwise. We have taken plunges in life ; there are many eras
noted in our existence. The greatest changes are those of which we
are the least able to give an account, and which we feel the most
disposed to refer to a superior power. That they were simply mys
terious, like some utterly unknown natural phenomena, is our first
thought about them. But although unable to fathom their true na
ture, we are capable of analysing many of the circumstances which
accompany them, and of observing the impulses out of which they
arise.
Every man has the power of forming a resolution, or, without
previous resolution, in any particular instance, acting as he will.
As thoughts come into the mind one cannot tell how, so too motives
spring up, without our being able to trace their origin. Why we
suddenly see a thing in a new light, is often hard to explain ; why
we feel an action to be right or wrong which has previously seemed
indifferent, is not less inexplicable. We fix the passing dream or
sentiment in action ; the thought is nothing, the deed may be every-
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 239
thing. That day after day, to use a familiar instance, the drunkard
will find abstinence easier, is probably untrue ; but that from once
abstaining he will gain a fresh experience,"and receive a new strength
and inward satisfaction, which may result in endless consequences,
is what every one is aware of. It is not the sameness of what
we do, but its novelty, which seems to have such a peculiar power
over us ; not the repetition of many blind actions, but the per
formance of a single conscious one, that is the birth to a new life.
Indeed, the very sameness of actions is often accompanied with a
sort of weariness, which makes men desirous of change.
Nor is it less true, that by the commission, not of many, but
a single act of vice or crime, an inroad is made into our whole
moral constitution, which is not proportionably increased by its
repetition. The first act of theft, falsehood, or other immorality, is
an event in the life of the perpetrator which he never forgets. It
may often happen that no account can be given of it ; that there is
nothing in the education, nor in the antecedents of the person, that
would lead us, or even himself, to suspect it. In the weaker sort of
natures, especially, suggestions of evil spring up we cannot tell how.
Human beings are the creatures of habit ; but they are the crea
tures of impulse too ; and from the greater variableness of the
outward circumstances of life, and especially of particular periods
of life, and the greater freedom of individuals, it may, perhaps, be
found that human actions, though less liable to wide-spread or sud
den changes, have also become more capricious, and less reducible
to simple causes, than formerly.
Changes in character come more often in the form of feeling than
of reason, from some new affection or attachment, or alienation of
our former self, rather than from the slow growth of experience, or a
deliberate sense of right and duty. The meeting with some particu
lar person, the remembrance of some particular scene, the last words
of a parent or friend, the reading of a sentence in a book, may call
forth a world within us of the very existence of which we were pre
viously unconscious. New interests arise such as we never before
240 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
knew, and we can no longer lie grovelling in the mire, but must be
up and doing ; new affections seem to be drawn out, such as warm
our inmost soul and make action and exertion a delight to us. Mere
human love at first sight, as we say, has been known to change the
whole character and produce an earthly effect, analogous to that
heavenly love of Christ and the brethren, of which the New Testa-
ment speaks. Have we not seen the passionate become calm, the
licentious pure, the weak strong, the scoffer devout ? We may not
venture to say with St. Paul, " This is a great mystery, but I speak
concerning Christ and the Church." But such instances serve, at
least, to quicken our sense of the depth and subtlety of human
nature.
Of many of these changes no other reason can be given than that
nature and the Author of nature have made men capable of them.
There are others, again, which we seem to trace, not only to particular
times, but to definite actions, from which they flow in the same manner
that other effects follow from their causes. Among such causes none
are more powerful than acts of self-sacrifice and devotion. A single
deed of heroism makes a man a hero ; it becomes a part of him, and,
strengthened by the approbation and sympathy of his fellow-men,
a sort of power which he gains over himself and them. Something
like this is true of the lesser occasions of life no less than of the
greatest ; provided in either case the actions are not of such a kind
that the performance of them is a violence to our nature. Many
a one has stretched himself on the rack of asceticism, without on the
whole raising his nature ; often he has seemed to have gained in
self-control only what he has lost in the kindlier affections, and by
his very isolation to have wasted the opportunities which nature
offered him of self-improvement. But no one with a heart open to
human feelings, loving not man the less, but God more, sensitive
to the happiness of this world, yet aiming at a higher, no man of
such a nature ever made a great sacrifice, or performed a great act
of self-denial, without impressing a change on his character, which
lasted to his latest breath. No man ever took his besetting sin, it
CONVEKSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 241
may be lust, or pride, or love of rank and position, and, as it were,
cut it out by voluntarily placing himself where to gratify it was im
possible, without sensibly receiving a new strength of character. In
one day, almost in an hour, he may become an altered man ; he may
stand, as it were, on a different stage of moral and religious life ;
he may feel himself in new relations to an altered world.
Nor, in considering the effects of action, must the influence of im
pressions be lost sight of. Good resolutions are apt to have a bad
name ; they have come to be almost synonymous with the absence
of good actions. As they get older, men deem it a kind of weakness
to be guilty of making them ; so often do they end in raising
"pictures of virtue, or going over the theory of virtue in our minds."
Yet this contrast between passive impression and active habit,
is hardly justified by our experience of ourselves or others. Value
less as they are in themselves, good resolutions are suggestive of
great good; they are seldom wholly without effect on our con
duct ; in the weakest of men they are still the embryo of action.
They may meet with a concurrence of circumstances in which they
take root and grow, coinciding with some change of place, or of
pursuits, or of companions, or of natural constitution, in which they
acquire a peculiar power. They are the opportunities of virtue,
if not virtue itself. At the worst they make us think ; they give us
an experience of ourselves ; they prevent our passing our lives in total
unconsciousness. A man may go on all his life making and not
keeping them ; miserable as such a state appears, he is perhaps not
the worse, but something the better for them. The voice of the
preacher is not lost, even if he succeed but for a few instants in
awakening them.
A further cause of sudden changes in the moral constitution is the
determination of the will by reason and knowledge. Suppose the
case of a person living in a narrow circle of ideas, within the limits of
his early education, perplexed by difficulties, yet never venturing
beyond the wall of prejudices in which he has been brought up,
or changing only into the false position of a rebellion against
VOL. II. R
242 EPISTLE TO THE ROMAKS.
them. A new view of his relation to the world and to God is
presented to him ; such, for example, as in St. Paul s day was the
grand acknowledgment that God was " not the God of the Jews
only ; " such as in our own age would be the clear vision of the truth
and justice of God, high above the clouds of earth and time, and of
his goodwill to man. Convinced of the reasonableness of the
Gospel, it becomes to him at once a self-imposed law. No longer
does the human heart rebel ; no longer has he " to pose his under
standing " with that odd resolution of Tertullian, " certum quia
impossibile." He perceives that the perplexities of religion have
been made, not by the appointment of God, but by the ingenuity of
man.
Lastly. Among those influences, by the help of which the will of
man learns to disengage itself from the power of habit, must not be
omitted the influence of circumstances. If men are creatures of
habit, much more are they creatures of circumstances. These two,
nature without us, and " the second nature " that is within, are the
counterbalancing forces of our being. Between them (so we may
figure to ourselves the working of the mind) the human will inserts
itself, making the force of one a lever against the other, and seeming
to rule both. We fall under the power of habit, and feel ourselves
weak and powerless to shake off the almost physical influence which
it exerts upon us. The enfeebled frame cannot rid itself of the ma
lady ; the palsied springs of action cannot be strengthened for good,
nor fortified against evil. Transplanted into another soil, and in a
different air, we renew our strength. In youth especially, the cha
racter seems to respond kindly to the influence of the external world.
Providence has placed us in a state in which we have many aids in
the battle with self; the greatest of these is change of circumstances.
We have wandered far from the subject of conversion in the early
Church, into another sphere in which the words " grace, faith, the
spirit," have disappeared, and notions of moral philosophy have taken
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 243
their place. It is better, perhaps, that the attempt to analyse our
spiritual nature should assume this abstract form. We feel that
words cannot express the life hidden with Christ and God ; we are
afraid of declaring on the housetop, what may only be spoken in the
closet. If the rites and ceremonies of the elder dispensation, which
have so little in them of a spiritual character, became a figure of the
true, much more may the moral world be regarded as a figure of the
spiritual world of which religion speaks to us.
There is a view of the changes of the characters of men which
begins where this ends, which reads human nature by a different
light, and speaks of it as the seat of a great struggle between the
powers of good and evil. It would be untrue to identify this view
with that which has preceded, and scarcely less untrue to attempt to
interweave the two in a system of " moral theology." No addition
of theological terms will transfigure Aristotle s Ethics into a "Summa
Theologize." When St. Paul says " O wretched man that I am, who
shall deliver me from the body of this death?" "I thank God
through Jesus Christ our Lord;" he is not speaking the language
of moral philosophy, but of religious feeling. He expresses what
few have truly felt concentrated in a single instant, what many have
deluded themselves into the belief of, what some have experienced
accompanying them through life, what a great portion even of the
better sort of mankind are wholly unconscious of. It seems as if
Providence allowed us to regard the truths of religion and morality
in many ways which are not wholly unconnected with each other,
yet parallel rather than intersecting ; providing for the varieties
of human character, and not leaving those altogether without law,
who are incapable in a world of sight of entering within the veil.
As we return to that " hidden life " of which the Scripture speaks,
our analysis of human nature seems to become more imperfect, less
reducible to rule or measure, less capable of being described in a
language which all men understand. What the believer recognises
as the record of his experience is apt to seem mystical to the rest of
the world. We do not seek to thread the mazes of the human soul,
R 2
244 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
or to draw forth to the light its hidden communion with its Maker,
but only to present in general outline the power of religion among
other causes of human action.
Directly, religious influences may be summed up tinder three
heads : The power of God ; the love of Christ ; the efficacy of
prayer.
(1.) So far as the influence of the first of these is capable of ana
lysis, it consists in the practical sense that we are dependent beings,
and that our souls are in the hands of God, who is acting through
us, and ever present with us, in the trials of life and in the work of
life. The believer is a minister who executes this work, hardly the
partner in it ; it is not his own, but God s. He does it with the
greatest care, as unto the Lord and not to men, yet is indifferent as
to the result, knowing that all things, even through his imperfect
agency, are working together for good. The attitude of his soul
towards God is such as to produce the strongest effects on his power
of action. It leaves his faculties clear and unimpassioned ; it places
him above accidents ; it gives him courage and freedom. Trusting
in God only, like the Psalmist, "he fears no enemy ; " he has no want.
There is a sort of absoluteness in his position in the world, which can
neither be made better nor worse; as St. Paul says: "All things
are his, whether life or death, or things present or things to come."
In merely human things, the aid and sympathy of others increase
our power to act : it is also the fact that we can work more effec
tually and think more truly, where the issue is not staked on the
result of our thought and work. The confidence of success would
be more than half the secret of success, did it not also lead to the
relaxation of our efforts. But in the life of the believer, the sym
pathy, if such a figure of speech may be allowed, is not human but
Divine; the confidence is not a confidence in ourselves, but in the
power of God, which at once takes us out of ourselves and increases
our obligation to exertion. The instances just mentioned have an
analogy, though but a faint one, with that which we are considering.
They are shadows of the support which we receive from the In-
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 245
finite and Everlasting. As the philosopher said that his theory of
fatalism was absolutely required to insure the repose necessary for
moral action, it may be said, in a far higher sense, that the con
sciousness of a Divine Providence is necessary to enable a rational
being to meet the present trials of life, and to look without fear on
his future destiny.
(2.) But yet more strongly is it felt that the love of Christ has this
constraining power over souls, that here, if anywhere, we are unlock
ing the twisted chain of sympathy, and reaching the inmost mystery
of human nature. The sight, once for all, of Christ crucified, recalling
the thought of what, more than 1800 years ago, he suffered for us,
has ravished the heart and melted the affections, and made the world
seem new, and covered the earth itself with a fair vision, that is, a
heavenly one. The strength of this feeling arises from its being
directed towards a person, a real being, an individual like ourselves,
who has actually endured all this for our sakes, who was above us,
and yet became one of us and felt as we did, and was like ourselves
a true man. The love which He felt towards us, we seek to return
to Him ; the unity which He has with the Divine nature, He com
municates to us ; His Father is our Father, His God our God.
And as human love draws men onwards to make sacrifices, and
to undergo sufferings for the good of others, Divine love also leads
us to cast away the interests of this world, and rest only in the
noblest object of love. And this love is not only a feeling or senti
ment, or attachment, such as we may entertain towards a parent, a
child, or a wife, in which, pure and disinterested as it may be, some
shadow of earthly passions unavoidably mingles ; it is also the
highest exercise of the reason, which it seems to endow with the force
of the affections, making us think and feel at once. And although it
begins in gentleness, and tenderness, and weakness, and is often sup
posed to be more natural to women than men, yet it grows up also
to " the fulness of the stature of the perfect man." The truest note
of the depth and sincerity of our feelings towards our fellow crea-
R 3
246 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
tures is a manly, that is, a self controlled temper : still more
is this true of the love of the soul towards Christ and God.
Every one knows what it is to become like those whom we
admire or esteem ; the impress which a disciple may sometimes
have received from his teacher, or the servant from his Lord.
Such devotion to a particular person can rarely be thought to open
our hearts to love others also ; it often tends to weaken the force of
individual character. But the love of Christ is the conducting
medium to the love of all mankind ; the image which He impresses
upon us is the image not of any particular individual, but of the Son
of Man. And this image, as we draw nearer to it, is transfigured
into the image of the Son of God. As we become like Him, we see
Him as He is ; and see ourselves and all other things with true
human sympathy. Lastly, we are sensible that more than all we
feel towards Him, He feels towards us, and that it is He who is
drawing us to Him, while we seem to be drawing to Him ourselves.
This is a part of that mystery of which the Apostle speaks, " of the
length, and depth, and breadth of the love of Christ," which passeth
knowledge. Mere human love rests on instincts, the working of
which we cannot explain, but which nevertheless touch the inmost
springs of our being. So, too, we have spiritual instincts, acting
towards higher objects, still more suddenly and wonderfully cap
turing our souls in an instant, and making us indifferent to all
things else. Such instincts show themselves in the weak no less than
in the strong ; they seem to be not so much an original part of our
nature as to fulfil our nature, and add to it, and draw it out, until
they make us different beings to ourselves and others. It was the
quaint fancy of a sentimentalist to ask whether any one who remem
bers the first sight of a beloved person, could doubt the existence of
magic. We may ask another question, Can any one who has
ever known the love of Christ, doubt the existence of a spiritual
power ?
(3.) The instrument whereby, above all others, we realise the
powsr of God, and the love of Christ, which carries us into their
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 247
presence, and places us within the circle of a Divine yet personal
influence, is prayer. Prayer is the summing up of the Christian life
in a definite act, which is at once inward and outward, the power of
which on the character, like that of any other act, is proportioned
to its intensity. The imagination of doing rightly adds little to our
strength ; even the wish to do so is not necessarily accompanied by a
change of heart and conduct. But in prayer we imagine, and wish,
and perform all in one. Our imperfect resolutions are offered up
to God ; our weakness becomes strength, our words deeds. No
other action is so mysterious ; there is none in which we seem,
in the same manner, to renounce ourselves that we may be one with
God.
Of what nature that prayer is which is effectual to the obtaining of
its requests is a question of the same kind as what constitutes a
true faith. That prayer, we should reply, which is itself most of an
act, which is most immediately followed by action, which is most
truthful, manly, self-controlled, which seems to lead and direct,
rather than to follow, our natural emotions. That prayer which
is its own answer because it asks not for any temporal good, but for
union with God. That prayer which begins with the confession,
" We know not what to pray for as we ought ; " which can never
by any possibility interfere with the laws of nature, because even
in extremity of danger or suffering, it seeks only the fulfilment of
His will. That prayer which acknowledges that our enemies, or
those of a different faith, are equally with ourselves in the hands of
God ; in which we never unwittingly ask for our own good at the
expense of others. That prayer in which faith is strong enough to
submit to experience ; in which the soul of man is nevertheless con
scious not of any self-produced impression, but of a true communion
with the Author and Maker of his being.
In prayer, as in all religion, there is something that it is impos
sible to describe, and that seems to be untrue the moment it is ex
pressed in words. In the relations of man with God, it is vain to
attempt to separate what belongs to the finite and what to the infinite.
R 4
248 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
We can feel, but we cannot analyse it. We can lay down practical
rules for it, but can give no adequate account of it. It is a mystery
which we do not need to fathom. In all religion there is an ele
ment of which we are conscious ; which is no mystery, which
ought to be and is on a level with reason and experience. There is
something besides, which, in those who give way to every vague
spiritual emotion, may often fall below reason (for to them it becomes
a merely physical state); which may also raise us above ourselves,
until reason and feeling meet in one, and the life on earth even of
the poor and ignorant answers to the description of the Apostle?
"^Having your conversation in heaven."
This partial indistinctness of the subject of religion, even indepen
dently of mysticism or superstition, may become to intellectual minds
a ground for doubting the truth of that which will not be altogether
reduced to the rules of human knowledge, which seems to elude
our grasp, and retires into the recesses of the soul the moment we
ask for the demonstration of its existence. Against this natural
suspicion let us set two observations : first, that if the Gospel had
spoken to the reason only, and not to the feelings if "the way to
the blessed life " had to be won by clearness of ideas, then it is impos
sible that " to the poor the Gospel should have been first preached."
It would have begun at the other end of society, and probably re
mained, like Greek philosophy, the abstraction of educated men-
Secondly, let us remark that even now, judged by its effects, the
power of religion is of all powers the greatest. Knowledge itself
is a weak instrument to stir the soul compared with religion ; mora
lity has no way to the heart of man ; but the Gospel reaches the
feelings and the intellect at once. In nations as well as individuals,
in barbarous times as well as civilised, in the great crises of history
especially, even in the latest ages, when the minds of men seem
to wax cold, and all things remain the same as at the beginning,
it has shown itself to be a reality without which human nature
would cease to be what it is. Almost every one has had the wit
ness of it in himself. No one, says Plato, ever passed from youth
CONVERSION AND CHANGES OF CHARACTER. 249
to age in unbelief of the gods, in heathen times. Hardly any
educated person in a Christian land has passed from youth to age
without some aspiration after a better life, some thought of the
country to which he is going.
As a fact, it would be admitted by most, that, at some period of
their lives, the thought of the world to come and of future judgment,
the beauty and loveliness of the truths of the Gospel, the sense of
the shortness of our days here, have wrought a more quickening and
powerful effect than any moral truths or prudential maxims. Many
a one would acknowledge that he has been carried whither he knew
not ; and had nobler thoughts, and felt higher aspirations, than the
course of his ordinary life seemed to allow. These were the most im
portant moments of his life for good or for evil ; the critical points
which have made him what he is, either as he used or neglected
them. They came he knew not how, sometimes with some outward
and apparent cause, at other times without, the result of affliction
or sickness, or " the wind blowing where it listeth."
And if such changes and such critical points should be found to
occur in youth more often than in age, in the poor and ignorant
rather than in the educated, in women more often than in men, if
reason and reflection seem to weaken as they regulate the springs of
human action, this very fact may lead us to consider that reason,
and reflection, and education, and the experience of age, and the force
of manly sense, are not the links which bind us to the communion of
the body of Christ ; that it is rather to those qualities which we
have, or may have, in common with our fellow-men, that the Gospel
is promised ; and that it is with the weak, the poor, the babes in
Christ, not with the strong-minded, the resolute, the consistent,
that we shall sit down in the kingdom of heaven.
250
[On. VIII.
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
apa vvv KaTaKpLua roi? iv X/HCTTW lyvov 1 6 yap 8
r\ / f * > ^ T ^ 5 \ /)
TOV TTVCVLHaTOS T779 4 W1 7^ ^ XP^^ ^ V L YJO OV 7^AVt/e- 2
ei> /xe 0,770 TOT) VOJJLOV r^s d/x-aprias /cal rot) OavaTov. TO 3
yap aSvvaTOV TOV vouov, Iv ($ rjO vzveL ota TT}? o~apKos, o
1 Add /UTj Kara adpKa irepiiraTOvaiv a\\a Kara
VIII. 115. The struggle
has passed away, and the con
queror and the conquered are side
by side. The two laws men
tioned in the last chapter, have
changed places, the one becoming
mighty from being powerless,
the other powerless from being
mighty. The helplessness of the
law has been done away in Christ,
that its righteous requirement
may be fulfilled in us, who walk
not after the flesh but after the
spirit. The Apostle returns upon
his former track that he may
contrast the two elements, not, as
in the previous chapter, in con
flict with each other, hopelessly
entangled by " occasion of the
commandment," but in entire se
paration and opposition. These
two, the flesh and the spirit, stand
over against one another, as life
and death, as peace and enmity
with God. Do what it will, the
flesh can never be subjected to
the law of God. And this an
tagonism is not an antagonism of
ideas only, but of persons also.
It is another mode of express
ing the same thought, to say
that they that are in the flesh
cannot please God. "But ye,"
the Apostle adds, " are not in the
flesh, but in the Spirit, which is
the Spirit of God and Christ, and
have the body dead, and the
Spirit that is in you life ; and as
God raised up Christ from the
dead, he will raise you up, be
cause you have His Spirit dwell
ing in you. Are we not debtors
then to live according to the Spi
rit, which is the only source of
life and immortality, under the
guidance of which, too, we are
no longer the servants but the
sons of God ? "
1. apa."] To those, then, who
are dead with Christ, who strug
gle against sin, who with the
mind serve the law of God, there
is therefore now no condemna
tion. The connexion is with the
whole of the previous subject.
vvv."] At this point of our ar
gument we may say. Compare
vwi, vii. 17.
rdis kv %otor-w,] may be com
pared with ol au<j)l IlXartuva,
HvQayopav, and the like. Yet
the preposition iv expresses, also,
the different relation in which
the disciple of Christ and of a
heathen philosopher stood to their
master.
The accidental division of the
chapter seems to correspond, in
this passage, with the actual
break in the sense. The crisis
has passed not again to return,
and the soul, though in its earthly
state, is, nevertheless, at rest.
The words, JJYJ Kara capita TTE-
pnrarovffLV a\\d Kara Trvevua, are
omitted in B. C. D. F. G. They
have been introduced into the
text from ver. 4., perhaps to
correct the apparently antino-
mian tendency of the Apostle s
doctrine.]
2. The Gospel has been some-
VER. 2, 3.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
251
3 There is therefore now no condemnation to them
2 which are in Christ Jesus. 1 For the law of the Spirit
of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law
3 of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in
1 Add who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit.
times represented as a law, some
times as a spirit ; as a rule to
which we must conform, and also
as a power with which we are en
dowed. Both aspects are united
in the expression, "the law of
the Spirit of life," which is a
kind of paradox, and may be
compared with "the law of faith,"
at the end of the third chapter.
Strictly speaking, in the language
of St. Paul, sin stands on the one
side, and the Spirit of God on
the other ; they answer respec
tively to the worse and the better
element of human nature ; while,
between the two is placed the
straight and unbending rule of
the law. But the law is used in
two other senses also, first, for
the rule of sin to which man has
subjected himself, and, secondly,
for the growth of the higher life,
the spirit which becomes a law,
the habit which strengthens into
a second and better nature. Law,
in the first of these two senses, is
but a figure to express the strength
and uniformity of the power of
evil ; in the second, it is the har
mony of human things in commu
nion with God and Christ : the
first is the law under which the
first Adam fell : the second, the
law, by the fulfilment of which
the second Adam redeemed man
kind.
2. VO/JLOV TrJQ ajuapT-iag KO.I TOV
Samrou, the law of sin and
death. ] But what law is thus
characterised ? The strength of
the language would not be a
positive proof that the Apostle is
not here speaking of the law of
Moses, if we may take the ex
pressions in Gal. iii. and iv. 3.,
and 1 Cor. xv. 56., where he
seems to speak of the law as
synonymous with "elements of
the world," and even as " the
strength of sin," as a measure of
his words. Such a view of the
words would also agree with the
following verse, which speaks of
the powerlessness of " the law
through the flesh," an expression
hardly suitable to the " law in
the members " that preceded,
which was not powerless, but
simply evil. Nor can we sup
pose that in the " law of sin and
death," no allusion is implied to
the law of Moses, even if the two
be not absolutely identical. Still
it is less liable to objection, to
take the law of sin and death in
the same general sense in which
the law of sin and the body of
death were spoken of in the pre
ceding chapter. It is the law of
Moses, and what the law of Mo
ses in its influence on the heart
and conscience has grown up
into and become, the law which
is the strength of sin, which is al
most sin, which was made death.
3. TO ycijO a^vrarov TOV rofiov,
for ivhat the law, Sf-c. ] (1.) For
God condemned sin in the flesh,
which was a thing that the law
could not do, ro a^vvuTOV TOV vo-
p.ov being in apposition with
252
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. VIII.
TOP
vov
iv
crap/cos
Tias /cat TTC/OI d/xaprias KaTCKpwtv rrjv d/xa/ma*> tv rfj
crapKi, wa TO Sc/caiw/xa TOV vofjiov 7T\r)pa)0fj eV rjp.lv roZs
/XT) /card crdpKa TrepnraTovcriv a\\a /carol Trvevpa. ol yap 5
/cara o-dpKa oVres ra TTjs crap/cos <f)povovo-LV, ol e /card
rd rou TT^eu/x-aros TO yap ^povrj^a TTJS crap/cos 6
, K.T.\.]OY (2.) making ro
independent, for touch
ing the powerlessness of the law,
in that it was weak through the
flesh, &c. This mode of taking
the passage sacrifices the gram
mar to the meaning. For ro
afivvctTOV TOV vopov begins one
sentence, and is met by 6 0eoe,
K-.r.X., which begins another. Sim
plicity is, however, a better guide
to the order of words in St. Paul
than classical refinement of con
struction.
To pass on to the sense. The
law was powerless, not in itself,
but because it was without in
struments for the service of God.
The weakness of the flesh could
never fulfil the requirements of
the law ; it seemed rather to jus
tify disobedience. But God sent
His own Son, in the likeness of
sinful flesh, and for sin, and con
demned sin in the flesh. The
sinless life of Christ showed that
even in the flesh sin was not na
tural or necessary. So we might
speak in a figure of the life or
conduct of another convicting or
condemning ourselves ; he might
show, that is, some virtue or
self-denial to be possible which
would otherwise have seemed
impossible. Some such analogy
as this is working in the Apostle s
mind. The other mode of taking
the words which refers them to the
death of Christ, regarded either
as a sacrifice for sin, or as the
punishment for sinful flesh, is in
consistent with ro dlvvaTov TOV
rojjiov. There is also an allusion
in the word KCLTEKOIVEV to mra/cp^o,
in ver. 1., " There is no condem
nation, because God condemned
sin in the flesh.
The meaning of the clause de
rives some additional light from
the words that follow. In Scrip
ture Christ is often said to be in
all points like ourselves ; and all
that we are, and are not, and
might have been, is transferred
to Him, either to be done away
with in us, or to be imparted to
us. Thus, in the language of
St. Paul, He died, that we might
be saved from death ; He became
a curse, to free us from the curse
of the law ; He condemned sin in
the flesh, that to us there might
be no condemnation. (Compare
ver. 1. and c)ta TOV i/7roraayra, in
ver. 20.) Also he condemned
sin that we might condemn it too;
or, in other words, that the righ
teousness of the law might be
fulfilled in us, who walk not after
the flesh, but after the spirit
(ver. 4.) : what is expressed in
the words icareKptvcv Trjv ayuajor/a^
kv Trj (rapKi is another aspect of
iva TO ^iK tuwjua TOV VO/JLOV 7r\r)p(i)6rj.
kv 6/io<wjucm,] in the likeness,
that is, the outward form or
figure of, as in Rev. ix. 7. ffdp
dpapTiac, flesh of sin, i. e. which
belongs to sin, is identified with
sin.
VER. 46.]
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
253
that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own
Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned
4 sin in the flesh : that the righteousness of the law might
be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after
5 the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind
the things of the flesh; but they that are after the
6 Spirit the things of the Spirit. For the mind of the
Trtpl a/joprtac.] Better in the
general sense of " for sin" than as
in Heb. x. 4. "for a sin offering."
Compare for the sense Heb. iv.
15.: TTETretpciffpevov
/caret TTCLVTCL
oyuoiorr/ra
4. Iva TO SiKoiufia rov v6p.ov.~\
" That the righteous require
ment of the law may be fulfilled
in us, who walk not after the
flesh but after the spirit." These
words have received three inter
pretations. They may be supposed
to refer : (1.) to Christ s fulfil
ment of the law, which is trans
ferred to us ; or, (2.) to our parti
cipation in his fulfilment of the law
by union with him ; or, (3.) to our
fulfilment of the law by the holi
ness which he imparts to us. In
other words, they may relate :
(1.) to an external righteousness ;
or, (2.) to a righteousness, exter
nal, but imparted ; or, (3.) to in
herent righteousness. Instead of
selecting one of these interpre
tations, the meaning of any of
which is defined by its antago
nism to the other two, we must
go back to the predoctrinal age
of the Apostle himself, ere such
distinctions existed. The whole
Christian life flows with him
from union with Christ. Whe
ther this union is conscious or
unconscious, whether it gives or
merely imputes the righteousness
of Christ, is a question which he
does not analyse. But in think
ing of it, he perceives a sort of
balance and contrast between the
humiliation of Christ and the
exaltation of the Christian. The
believer seems to gain what his
master has lost. He throws on
Christ the worse half of self, that
the better half may be endued
with the spirit of life.
5. In the fifth verse the Apo
stle expresses in the concrete
what in the sixth he repeats in
the abstract.
For they that walk according
to the flesh, have the mind and
do the deeds of the flesh, and
therefore cannot fulfil the law.
Their being in the flesh is no
mere imaginary state ; it implies
having the wishes and desires of
the flesh.
6. (ppovrjfjia. Trjc ffcif)Koc.~] "Which
some do expound the wisdom,
some sensuality, some the affec
tion, some the desire of the
flesh." Art. ix.
" The mind " in the sense of
" will, intention," more nearly
answers to the Greek than any
of these.
In this and the following
verses the Apostle, as in vii. 8.,
returns upon the track of the
preceding chapter. He is speak
ing of the struggle which is now
past, the elements of which no
longer exist together in the same
human soul, but are the types of
classes of men living in two dif-
254
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
H. VIII.
TO oe ^po^^a TOV TrvevpaTOS a)rj KOL elptfvrj.
SIOTI TO <f)pov7)p.a T7J$ crap/cos e^Opa ets 0eov rw yap 7
^0/ifc) TOT) Oeov ov-fc vTTOTacrcreTaL, ovSe yap Suparai. ot 8
Se eV (rapid oWes #e< dpecrcu ov Swcurat. v/xet9 Se 9
ov/c ecrre eV crap/d a\\ eV TrvevpaTL, el ?rep
Oeov oiKel ev V\LW. el Se ris rrvev^a ^picrTov OVK
oSros OUAC ecrrt^ avTOV. et Se ^pta-ros ez^ vftt^, TO p^v 10
cra)fjia vtKpov Sta d/x,apriaj>, TO Se irvev^ia ^COT) Sid
el Se TO Trvevpa TOV eyeipavTOS TOV n
AC veKpa>v olKel iv VJJAV, 6 eyetpa?
[ 5 l7?o-075i>] e/c veKpwv ^woTroi^crei /cal Ta
Xp. Om. i
ferent worlds. In ver. 6. we have
what may be termed a further
epexegesis of ver. 5., as ver. 5.
was of ver. 4., both being con
nected by the favourite yop. As
in ver. 5. he took up the words
trap?, and Trrevpa from ver. 4., so
here he takes up the word <f>poi>~it>
from ver. 5.
avaro.] Not physical, but
spiritual death, the state of dis
cord which he had described in
the preceding chapter, which in
the next verses he describes as
enmity against God, opposed to
the state of life and peace.
7. For the mind of the flesh is
that state which we have de
scribed above of " enmity against
God ;" for it is not subject to the
law of God, for it cannot be : it
involves, as we should say, a
moral, almost a physical impossi
bility, for it to conform to a rule.
Compare above, vii. 18. : "For I
know that in me (that is, in my
flesh) dwelleth no good thing."
8. ol $ U aapid ovreq.~\ The
3e in this passage may be re
garded either as a mere connect
ing particle, or may be explained
as arising out of the general op
position of ffap and TTVEV^CL which
runs through the passage.
9. t L Trfp . . . v/ju^.^ Compare
John, xiv. 23.: "My father
will love him, and we will come
unto him and make our abode
with him."
As in chapter vi. St. Paul
spoke of the Christian as being
dead with Christ, so in this he
speaks of his living with Him.
These are the two stages of the
believer s being, which have many
names and aspects : slavery,
freedom, strife, peace ; the flesh,
the spirit, death, resurrection,
suffering, glory.
The spirit is spoken of in
Scripture indifferently as the
Spirit of God or of Christ, Phil,
i. 19. ; or of the Son, Gal. iv. 6.;
sometimes under the more ge
neral term of the Spirit of the
Lord, as in 2 Cor. iii. 17, 18.
Here the Apostle makes a sudden
transition from the Spirit of God
to that of Christ, and returns
again in the eleventh verse to
speak of " the Spirit of Him that
raised up Christ from the dead."
VER. 711.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
255
flesh* is death; but the mind of the Spirit* is life and
7 peace. Because the mind of the flesh* is enmity against
God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither in-
s deed can be; and* they that are in the flesh cannot
9 please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the
Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.
Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none
10 of his. But* if Christ be in you, the body is dead be
cause of sin ; but the Spirit is life because of righteous-
11 ness. But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from
the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ Jesus 1
1 Om. Jesus.
The change is not accidental ;
it is designed to give point to the
words OVTOQ ovic tffriv avTOv. But if
a man have not that spirit, which
(being the Spirit of God) is also
that of Christ, he is not Christ s.
10. " But if Christ be in you,
the body is dead because of sin ;
but the Spirit is life, because of
righteousness." The same ques
tion which was asked at chap. iv.
ver. 25. again recurs, " What is
the meaning of the antithesis ? "
and must again receive the same
answer, that the antithesis be
longing rather to the form than
to the substance of the Apostle s
thought, must not be too closely
pressed. There is no difficulty
in the second member of the sen
tence, which may be paraphrased:
" The Spirit is life, because of
the righteousness imputed to it
and inherent in it, its own and
Christ s." It is not clear, how
ever, in what sense the body can
be said to be dead because of sin.
Either, it may be, (1.) dead be
cause sin would otherwise live, of
which the body is the seat (comp.
ver. 13.), or (2.), dead because
sin is its destroying power "sin
revived and I died," as described
in the preceding chapter; or (3.),
dead because the sinful body has
no element of immortality in it
self, but will be hereafter raised,
not of itself, but by the Spirit
which dwells in it. According
to either of the two last ways of
taking the passage, the death
of the body is not looked upon
as a good, but as an evil, which
is compensated for by the quick
ening of the Spirit. For a time
the body is dead either in a
spiritual or a natural sense ;
either inert and incapable of the
service whether of God or sin, or
devoid of the seed of a future life.
But God will revive it whether
to natural or spiritual life or
both : if the Spirit which raised
up Christ is the Spirit which also
dwells in us.
11. The spiritual resurrection
suggests the thought of the ac
tual resurrection, as in John, v.
25. In this world the quicken
ing Spirit and the mortal body
exist separate from each other ;
but hereafter the Spirit shall re
animate the body, as it is the
Spirit of Him who raised up
Christ from the dead ; who will
do as much for us as he did for
256
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. VIII.
Sia rov 1 eVoiKowros avrov Tn/evjuaros eV vplv.
apa GUI/, d8eX<cH, 6<eiXeYai, ea//^ ov rfj crap/d rot) Kara 12
tfiv. d yap Kara crapfca frjre, /xeXXere d?ro- is
d Se TTvev^ari ras Trpafets TOT) craj/^aros
fyja-eo-Qe. ocroi yap TT^ev/xart #eov ayovrai, u
OVTOI mot etcrt^ #eov. 2 ov yap eXa/Sere irvevpa SovXeta? 15
7rdX(,i> ets fyoftov, dXXa eXa/Sere TT^ev/^a vioOecrias, iv w
A/3/Ba 6
Avro TO TTvev^La crv^^apTvpd TOJ TT^eu/^ari ^/xa^, OTL IG
TCKva deov. el 8e re/era Kal KXrjpovojJioi K\yjpo- 17
1 rb evoiKovv . . Trj/euua. 2 etcrir ufol 0eov.
Christ, rci $vr]Ta o-ajuara, your
bodies that would die were it
not for His quickening Spirit.
Compare vi. 12.
ca ro EVOIKOVV avrov
has a large majority of patristic,
as 3ta rov ivoiKovvroQ avrov 7rvf.v-
/xaroe of MS. authority in its fa
vour. It makes little difference
whether we look upon the Holy
Spirit as the cause, or as the in
strument of the resurrection, the
mode of which so far transcends
human language and thought.
12. Knowing that the body is
dead, because of sin, and the
Spirit is life, because of righteous
ness, and looking forward to the
resurrection of the dead, ought
we to live according to the flesh?
The tho ught is the same, though
less strongly expressed than in
chap. vi. 2. : " How shall we, who
are dead to sin, live any longer
therein ? " which is worked out
in a similar manner in the follow
ing verses : " That as Christ rose
from the dead in the glory of the
Father, so we also may walk in
newness of life."
13. The Apostle returns upon
ver. 6., repeating, as his manner
is, in the concrete what he had
thrice said in the abstract, and
alluding again to the actual death
and resurrection, the thought of
which had been introduced in
ver. 11. : " For if ye live accord
ing to the flesh, that is not only
present but future death ; but if
ye by the Spirit put to death the
deeds of the body, ye shall live."
Comp. Gal. v. 24., "And they
that are Christ s have crucified
the flesh with the affections and
lusts ; " and Col. iii. 5., " Mor
tify, therefore, your members
which are upon the earth."
14. The Apostle proceeds to
describe the relation of the re
generate to God by a yet nearer
figure ; they are the sons of God
as Christ is, they are the mem
bers of his family, they feel to
wards him as a Father, they are
the heirs of His glory. In their
love to him, and in his to them,
in the forgiveness of their offen
ces, in the rest of their eternal
home, they are conscious that
they are his children
yap expresses the ground of
//<7f<r0f: "You shall live, for
you are the sons of God, for the
VER. 12-17.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
257
from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by
12 his Spirit that dwelleth in you. Therefore, brethren, we
is are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For
if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through
the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall
H live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they
is are the sons of God. For ye have not received the
spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received
the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
is The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that
17 we are the children of God : and if children, then heirs;
Spirit which you have received
is the Spirit of adoption."
This new relation between God
and man is introduced by the
Gospel. It is not literally true
that, in the Old Testament, the
children of Israel are not spoken
of as the sons of God, but only
as his subjects and servants ; but
it is true that in their essential
character the law ^nd the Gospel
are thus opposed, as the spirit of
bondage again to fear, and the
Spirit of adoption, whereby we
acknowledge God as a father.
15. The Apostle brings home
to the Roman converts the na
ture of the Gospel by an appeal
to their own experience. For a
similar appeal, compare Gal. iii.
2.: * fjoywy vofJLOv TO Tivtvpa c Xa-
(3eT T] c ctKofjf; TriffrewQ. The
repetition of eXafiere is empha
tic, as in Heb. xii. 8. ; Eph.
ii. 17. 19. Compare, again, for
this and the following verse,Gal.
iv. 6, 7. OTI i)e EffTe vio/j ta-
TTf 0reiXej> 6 SeoQ TO irvevfjia. TOV vlov
avTovelg TctQ Kap^tag fyuaiv, Kpaot>
9 A/3f3d 6 TrttTrjp. &ffT OVKtTl 1 COV-
Xoe, aXXa vice * ei <5e vtoe, Kal K\YJ-
povopoQ Sia Seov. The two words
mean the same. A/3/3d is the
vocative. The origin of the
VOL. II. S
common formula in which they
were both retained is uncer
tain.
16. AVTO TO TTvevpa, the Spirit
itself. ;] The Spirit has been
spoken of already as the Spirit of
adoption (v. 15.), as the Spirit
of God, in v. 9., also as the Spirit
of Christ, and, v. 11., the Spirit
of them that raised up Christ
from the dead. It now becomes
more abstract and personal ;
comp. 1 Cor. ii. 11. ; 2 Cor. iii.
17. We may conceive of two
Spirits, the dwelling-place of
both being the human soul : the
first a higher, which is the Spirit
of God, and a lower, which is
our own ; the one bears witness
with the other that we are the
children of God. For o-v/^ap-
Tvpel comp. 1 John, v. 10., "He
that believeth in the Son of
God hath the witness in himself;"
and below, ver. 26. ; also, ix. 1.,
" My conscience also bearing me
witness in the Holy Spirit.**
The Spirit is essentially the com
munion of the spirit and the
conscious witness of itself.
17. The Apostle follows the
train of thought suggested by
the human figure, which he has
just employed : "If we be the
258
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. VIII.
060V, CrVyK\7)pOv6p.OL e -^LCTTOV, ti 7Tp
, tVa /cat crwSofacr#a>/x,ei>. Xoyioj/,ai yap is
ort OUK: afia ra TraOrjfJiaTa TOV vvv Kaipov Trpos TT)I>
Sdfa^ aVo/caXv^^ai els 17/^9. 17 yap dVo- 19
rrjs /m crea>9 TT)^ aVo/caXvi/w TWV vi&v row
rij ya/> /mraioT^Ti 17 KTICTIS virerdyrj, 20
sons of God, we are his heirs,
and partakers of the inheritance
of Christ, as in His sufferings so
also in His glory." Comp. John,
xvii. 22., Rev. iii. 21. ; also, Col.
iii. 4, 5., 2 Tim. ii. 12., 1 Peter,
iv. 13.
The new thought is carried on
to a climax, and then surrounded
with the imagery in which the
Apostle habitually describes the
relation of the believer to Christ.
18. \oyio[jia.iyap,forlreckon. ]
Expressive, not of doubt, but of
reflection : " For when I speak
of our present sufferings and our
future glory, I consider that
there is no comparison between
them."
In Scripture, the glory of the
saints is sometimes spoken of as
future, sometimes as present ;
sometimes as at a distance, at
other times upon the earth; some
times as an external state or con
dition ; at other times as an
inward and spiritual change, to
be revealed in them as they are
transformed from glory to glory.
In the writings of St. Paul it .is
the spiritual sense of a future life
which chiefly prevails, as in this
passage. He does not paint
scenes of the world to come : he
is lost in it ; "whether in the
body or out of the body he can
not tell."
19. a7ro/ca|Oao/aa,]Phil. i. 20. ;
, Etym. Mag. : " For this re
velation of the sons of God is
what shall be, and what the in
tense desire of the creature wait
ing for it intimates."
As we turn from ourselves to
the world around us, the pro
spect on which we cast our eyes
seems to reflect the tone and colour
of our own minds, and to share
our joy and sorrow. To the re
ligious mind it seems also to re
flect our sins. We cannot, indeed,
speak of the misery of the brute
creation, of whose constitution
we know so little ; nor do we
pretend to discover in the love
liest spots of earth, indications of
a fallen world. But when we
look at the vices and diseases of
mankind, at their life of labour
in which the animals are our
partners, at the aspect in mo
dern times of our large towns, as
in ancient of a world given to
idolatry, we see enough to give
a meaning to the words of the
Apostle. The evil in the world
bears witness with the evil and
sorrow in our own hearts. And
the hope of another life springs
up unbidden in our thoughts, for
the sake of ourselves and of our
fellow creatures.
The exact meaning of the
word Kriffic, in ver. 19. 22., has
been a subject of great difference
of opinion among commentators.
Some have referred it, (1.) to
the inanimate, others (2.) to the
brute creation ; while others have
thought they saw in it (3.) the
Gentile as opposed to the Jewish
world. The first two of these
three interpretations have little
VER. 1820.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
259
heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; since* we
suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together,
s For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time
are not worthy to be compared with the glory which
9 shall be revealed unto* us. For the earnest expectation
of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons
:o of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity,
except, perhaps, poetical figures
to support them, common to all
nations ; while the last of them
seems narrow as well as inap
propriate to the present passage,
in which the acceptance of the
Gen tiles having been the subject
of the whole Epistle, could not
be spoken of as a distant aspira
tion, but as an actual and present
fact. Considering the various
uses which we have already ob
served of the words, rop.oc, TTVZV-
pa, &c., in successive verses, there
would be nothing extravagant in
supposing that the word Krlatg,
which occurs four times, was not
to be taken in each of the four
verses in which it is used, in pre
cisely the same sense. It may
refer to the creature considered
from within, in which sense it is
a personified ffapZ, which is the
best explanation of it in ver. 19.;
or to the creature considered
from without, as the figure of a
former dispensation, which is the
sense to which it inclines in ver.
20, 21. ; or to the creation col
lectively, of which man is, never
theless, the principal part, as in
ver. 22. That even this last is
not to be pressed too strictly, we
shall see in considering ver. 23.,
the form of which seems to ex
clude the believer from the circle
of creation.
20. /ucn-aiorrjn, vanity, nothing
ness, what is afterwards termed
aQ. The connexion
of this verse with the preceding
is as follows : " The creature
desires redemption ; for though it
is subject to vanity, it was not
of its own will that it became
subject."
It never fell, we may para
phrase, to the level of the brutes,
but had always a wish for bet
ter things, a monitor which wit
nessed of its better state.
a\\u dm TOV v7roruujTa, but by
reason of him who hath subjected. ]
These words can scarcely be sup
posed to refer to Adam, who, "as
in him all died," might indeed
indirectly be considered as the
cause of salvation. But the
meaning of the word viroraaaeiv is
ill-suited to express this indirect
effect ; nor is it likely that 6 I/TTO-
7-aae, used thus generally, could
refer to any but God or Christ.
It is not quite clear, however,
whether it is to God or Christ
the words are to be referred.
The Apostle is speaking here, as
elsewhere, of the double cha
racter of the scheme of Provi
dence, consisting, as it did, of two
parts, one of which had a refer
ence to the other. As afterwards
he says (xi. 32.) " God con
cluded all under sin that he miglit
have mercy upon all ; " so here
The creature was made subject
to evil against its will, and with
the hope of restoration, because
s 2
260
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. VIII.
tKOVcra aXXa Sia TOP vTroTa^avra CTT eXTTiSi, on KOL 2 *
vTJ) rj KTiVis l\ev6epo)OTJo-Tai CLTTO rr?s SouXeia? rrjs
$0opas ets rrjv i\tv6epiav TT}S Sdfyys rwv tixvuv rov
6eov. oiSa/ie^ yap Sri Tracra 07 KTICTIS crvo-rem^ei Kal 22
roO PW ov povov Se, dXXa /cat avrot 23
TOV
* Kal avroi
eavTois (TTevaipuzv viouecriava7rK.o)(oi^tvui, TrjvaTroXvTpa)-
ariv TOV crc^naTOs rjjjitov. Trj yap eXTTiSi ecrw^/^ei eXTris Se 24
1 al TjjLieTs ai)rof.
to Himself:" as the Creator con
sidered as the Author and Ap-
pointer of all His creatures ; as
the Redeemer, the final cause and
end of their sinful state. In de
fence of this twofold meaning of
vVoraae, compare the transition
from God to Christ in ver.9. 11.;
also Col. i. 15.
eV \7rt^t] refers partly to what
precedes and also to what follows.
21. on,] either "because" or
"in hope that." If the latter
sense is adopted, the meaning will
be either "It was subjected be
cause of him that subjected it in
hope that;" or "it was subjected
in hope that." It is, however,
more in accordance with the
idiom of the Apostle to put a stop
after eV e\7ri^i (which may be
connected either with vTreray?? or
with i/7roraavra), and to regard
the clause dependent on on as a
further explanation from the ob
jective side of what t XTrtc ex
presses subjectively.
els ri]v IXevO. is put in what is
termed a pregnant construction
after IXevdepwQrj fferat : ri}Q o?/e
parallel with TTJQ <f>6opa. Com
pare Gal. iv. 26. : " But the
Jerusalem that is above is free."
The creation is to those who
have the first fruits of the Spirit,
as the body to the soul. As the
first shall partake of the glorious
of him who subjected the same;
or the creature was made subject
because of him who subjected the
same, in hope that, etc. Connect
ing err iXiriSi with the following
clause, " the creature," we might
paraphrase, " had no love for this
helpless state. He was subjected
to it because of him that sub
jected him, in the hope that
grace might yet more abound."
But who is "he who subjected ?"
First, Christ, on account of whose
special work the creature was
made subject to vanity. (The pre
position ^m has no proper mean
ing, if the word v^ora^ac is re
ferred exclusively to God.) He
subjected the creature as he con
demned sin in the flesh in his own
person, by subjecting Himself.
And yet though the work of re
demption be attributed to Him, it
seems inappropriate to regard
Him also as the author of the
fallen condition of man. There
is the same impropriety in such a
mode of expression as there
would be in saying " Christ con
cluded all under sin that he might
have mercy upon all." In the
language of St. Paul, he is the
instrument of our redemption,
not its first author. More truly,
in the word virora^avra God
and Christ seem to meet. "God
in Christ reconciling the world
VER. 2124.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
261
not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected
21 the same in hope, because* the creature itself also shall
be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the
22 liberty of the * glory of the children of God. For we
know that the whole creation groan eth and travaileth in
2 3 pain together until now. And not only they, but our
selves also which have the first-fruits of the Spirit, even
we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for theadop-
24 tion, to wit, the redemption of our body. For we are
saved by hope : but hope that is seen is not hope : for
liberty of the sons of God, so also
the body shall be redeemed in
the sons of God themselves. For
their sonship is not yet attained ;
like the rest of creation, they are
waiting for it.
22. For we know how great is
the contrast of its present state
which yet continues. &\P L T0 ^
vi> v contains an allusion to the
speedy termination of this state.
23. rr\v cnrapy^v TOV Trvevfjia.-
TOQ iyovTc.~\ These words may
bear four different meanings :
either, (1.) we who have the gift
of the Spirit ; or, (2.) who have
the first fruits of the Spirit, as
being first called ; or, (3.) who
have the first fruits, in the sense
of the choicest gifts of the Spirit;
or, (4.) who have the earnest or
anticipation of the Spirit. The
last explanation is the best, the
very idea of first fruits implying
an earnest : " Even we who
have here on earth the begin
nings of that Spirit, with which
we shall have a fuller commu
nion in glory." Comp. ctjopa^wj/
TOV TrvzvfjLaTOc, 1 Cor. i. 22. ; ap-
pa&wv rijg K\r)povop,tag, Eph. i. 14.
For the thought compare the
passages in which St. Paul speaks
of the contradiction of the Chris
tian life, 2 Cor. v. 4. : For
we that are in this tabernacle
do groan, being burdened : not
that we would be unclothed,
but clothed upon, that mortality
might be swallowed up of life."
~
_
ive ourselves. ] We believers ; the
repetition of avrol ... 7/jueTe avrol is
not intended to confine the words
to the Apostles, but to emphasize
the consciousness of this sadness
in the believer s soul. It will be
said, if all creation is compre
hended in the previous verse, how
can the believer be excluded ?
Must we not confine the meaning
of Trdffa // KriffiQ to the world in
opposition to the elect ? We
have seen before, in Gal. vi. 16.
and Rom. iv. 12., that it is not
necessary to regard the rules of
logic to the injury of the sense.
In this passage the Apostle first
thought of the whole world in a
general manner, and then singled
out a particular class, which to
the spiritual eye " was not in the
world," without remembering that
he had previously included it.
aTToXirpwo-ic, K. r. X.,] not "re-
demptiori from the body " (which
is not to the Apostle s present
purpose (v. 21.), and is also in-
s 3
262
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. VIII.
/3Xe7roju,eV>7 OVK ecrrtJ> eXTTtV o yap /3XeVet Tts, Tt 1 eX7rt et ; el 25
Se o ov /3XeVoju,ej> e 5 Xmo//,ej>, St VTTOIAOVYJS aTTeK^xo^Oa.
Se /cat TO Tr^eu/ia crwa^TtXaju/Jaz eTat T# 26
v. 2 TO yap Tt Trpocrtv^tofJieda KaOo Set ou/c
dXX auro TO Trvevpa vrrepwrvyyavu 3 <rTej>ay/x,ots
6 Se ipevvvv Tag /capStas otSez/ Tt TO ^povrn^a 97
, 6Vt /caTa #eoz> eVTuy^dVet vTrep ayicov.
Se oTt Totg ayaTTOMTLV rov 6ebv Travra (rvvepyti 23
eos ets TO ayadov, Tot? /caTa TrpoOecnv /cX^Tots ovcrtz^.
6Vt ou? TT^oey^a), /cat TTpowpLcrev orv^op^ov^ TT}S et/coVos 29
To
rt
consistent with, the active mean
ing of the word a7roXurpw<rtc), but
" redemption of the body."
24. For what we are saved by
is hope, which is not yet swal
lowed up in sight ; and (le) there
would be no meaning in it, if it
were, yap implies that our sal
vation is not inconsistent with
this sorrowing expectation.
25. The very mode of our re
demption implies patient expec
tation. a.TTK()e-%6iJLda alludes to
aTTEK&EyoiJiEVQi) in ver. 23.
2330. The connexion of
these verses may be traced as
follows :
(1.) We walk feebly by hope
and not by sight, waiting for the
redemption of the body. 23 25.
(2.) But this feebleness the Spi
rit helps, and ever makes earnest
intercession for us. 26, 27.
(3.) And there is another side
to this view of creation groaning
together ; viz. that in all things
God is working together for good
to them that love Him ; there are
many steps in the ladder of God s
Providence foreknowledge, pre
destination, vocation, justifica
tion, glory.
The use of the particle li five
times in as many verses, is almost
8 far. uTrep ^/j.wy.
Omit
as difficult to analyse as in other
places the still more favourite -yap.
In ver. 24, 25. the repetition of
Sfi is slightly adversative. "But
we must not suppose that hope is
sight." "But we must not expect
immediate fruition of what we
hope for." In ver. 26, 27, 28. the
Be, which is three times repeated,
is also adversative. In all three
cases St is best taken coordinately ;
they express the other side of the
Apostle s argument which is also
the confirmation of what has pre
ceded.
26. l<7avrwe, likewise. ] That
is, the movement of the Spirit of
God corresponds and coincides
with this patient expectation in
ourselves [comp. above ver. 16. :
the Spirit beareth witness with
our Spirit]. " We are saved by
hope, not by sight, and with this
our imperfect condition it agrees
well that we have the Spirit for
our help." For in our very
prayers we know not what to
ask as we ought ; but when
language fails, the Spirit utters
for us a cry inexpressible : comp.
Eph. vi. *18., " Praying always
with all prayer and supplication
in the Spirit ;" and 1 Cor. ii. 11.
quoted above.
VER. 2529.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
263
25 what a man seeth, why doth he 1 hope for? But if we
hope for that we see not, we with patience wait for it.
26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmity 2 :
for we know not what we should pray for as we
ought : but the Spirit itself maketh intercession 3 with
27 groanings which cannot be uttered. And he that
searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the
Spirit, that* it* maketh intercession for the saints
23 according to the will of God. And we know that 4 in all
things God works together for good to them that love
God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be
1 Add yet. 2 Infirmities. 3 Add for us. 4 All things work together.
Kara SeoV] = according to the
will of God. Comp. Kara TrovQemv,
ver. 28., and iXvTrijOrjTE fcara SEOJ ,
2 Cor. vii. 9. 28.
28. Not only have we hope,
and patience, and the gift of the
Spirit ; but we know that in all
things God works together for
good with them that love Him ;
or, according to the reading of
the Textus Receptus (the au
thority for which is nearly evenly
balanced), " but we know that
all things work together for good
to them that love God ; " who
moreover are chosen according
to His purpose. In these latter
words the Apostle indicates a
further ground of hope and com
fort.
29. on OVG TTQoiyvb) KOI Trpow-
PKTEV, whom he did foreknow.^
This verse is a further explana
tion of the previous words ro7c
KUTCL TrpoQeaiv K\r)ToT.Q ovair.
About the meaning of Trpolyvw,
which from its use in this pas
sage has become a sort of key
note in theology, commentators
are disagreed. Three principal
. ] Comp. 2 Cor. xii.
5. : " For myself I will not glory
except in mine infirmities."
TO yap. The article includes
under it the words that follow
(ri . . . 2e7), which maybe regarded
as its substantive.
virtptVTvyya.vf.1, makes request.~]
In this passage only used for
IvTwyxavei, see ver. 27. and xi. 2.
aXaXj/roig, unutterable.^ Comp.
1 Peter, i. 8., dve/cXaX^roe ; 2
Cor. xi. 15., arK^u ]yr]Tog.
It sounds strangely to us at
first, that the Spirit should be
spoken of as "uttering cries."
But the Spirit of God bearing
witness with our spirits takes
part in all our acts. It is we
who cry aloud for help to God,
and God knows this is the cry of
those who are moved by his
Spirit.
27. Comp. 1 John, iii. 21. :
" Beloved, if our heart condemn
us, God is greater than our heart
and knoweth all things."
on, K. r. X.] not because, but
" that ; " the clause following ex-
plains ri TO
264
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
[OH. VIII.
rov vlov avroG, eis TO iv<u avrov irpwTOTOKOv eV TroXXois
dSeX<ois ous 8e 7rpoa>picrev, TOVTOVS KOI eWXeo ei Kal so
ovs KaXecrez>, TOVTOUS KCU eSifcaicocrez> . ovs Se eSi/ccuaJcrez ,
TOVTOVS fcal e5dfacrez>.
Tt o?^ ipov^v 7T/)os ravra ; ei 6 #eos v?rep ^//-wr, 31
TIS Ka# yptov ; os ye rot) tStov wou ou/c ec^eicraro, 52
a-XXa uTre/o rftjitov Travrw TraptSajKev OLVTOV, TTWS ov^i Kat
significations have been assigned
to it : (1.) Whom he fore-de
termined ; or (2.) whom he fore-
approved ; or, (3.), whom he
fore-knew, he fore-determined.
As the first explanation may be
used to support predestination
irrespective and absolute, so the
third may be appealed to in sup
port of that view of predestina
tion which makes it conditional
and dependent on fore-know
ledge. Accordingly, the Cal-
vinistic and Arminian commen
tators have respectively supported
these two lines of interpretation.
The use of the word Trpotyrw is
sufficiently uncertain to afford
some ground on which to main
tain either.
In most passages of the New
Testament where TrpoyivwcKetv
and cognate words occur, as Rom.
xi. 2., 1 Pet. i. 2., i. 20., Acts,
ii. 23., the meaning of "prede
termined, fore-appointed," is the
more natural. "God hath not
cast off his people whom he fore-
appointed " (ovg TTjOoe y via). " By
the determinate counsel and
fore-appointment of God" (rrj
&pi<T[jiei>ri /3ouXrj rat Trpoyvojcrei).
Yet, on the other hand, Acts, xxvi.
5., 2 Pet. iii. 17., admit only of
the meaning of "know before
hand," but not in reference to the
Divine or prophetic fore-know
ledge, and have, therefore, no
bearing on the present passage.
The idea of fore-knowledge,it may
be observed, as distinct from pre
destination, is scarcely discernible
in Scripture, unless, perhaps, a
trace of it be found in Acts, xv.
18. : ," Known unto God are all
his works from the beginning."
The Israelite believed that all
things were according to the
counsel and appointment of God.
Whether this was dependent on
his previous knowledge of the
intentions of man, was a question
which, in that stage of human
thought, would hardly have oc
curred to him. The theories of
predestination, which have been
built upon the words in the La
tin or English version of them,
" whom he did fore-know, them
he did predestinate," are an after
thought of later criticism.
We are thus led to consider
the interpretation of fore-ap
pointed, fore-acknowledged, as
the true one. We might still
translate fore-knoweth in the
sense in which God is said to
" know " them that are His. There
might be a degree of difference in
meaning between Trpoeyrw, "fore
knew," as the internal purpose of
God, if such a figure of speech
may be allowed, and "predes
tined," as the solemn external
act by which He, as it were, set
apart His chosen ones. Such a
distinction would be in keeping
with the gradation of the words
VER. 3032.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
265
conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the
so firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he
did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he
called, them he also justified: and whom he justified,
them he also glorified.
31 What shall we then say to these things ? If God
32 be for us, who can be against us ? He that spared
not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all,
that follow ; it might also be
gained in another way, by taking
TTjOowjOiorev closely with crv/ijuo p^ove:
either " whom he fore-determined
them he fore-appointed ;" or
"whom he fore-determined he
fore-determined to be like his
Son." TOVTO <) tTT~irpTa(f)Opag ianv
liireiv avftpuirivaQ. The Apostle
is overflowing with the sense of
the work of God: what he chiefly
means to say is, that all its acts
and stages are His, now and here
after, on earth and in heaven.
ELQ ro flvcu,] the end being
that Christ should not be the only-
begotten Son of God, but the
first-begotten among many.
TrpwTOTOKov."] As in Col. i. 15.
Christ is called the firstborn of
every creature, a figure which
in Col. i. 18. is also applied to
his resurrection TrpwroroKog EK
30. To predestine refers to the
act, on God s part, external to
man, as to call to the act in man
by which the Divine presence is
first signified to him. To justify
is the completion of the work
of God upon earth, when the
spirit of man no longer strives
with him, as to glorify is its final
fulfilment arid accomplishment in
the kingdom of heaven.
31 39. All creation is groan
ing together ; but the Spirit
helps us, and God has chosen us
according to His purpose, and in
all things God is working with
us for good. The Lord is on our
side ; and as He has given us
His Son, will give us all else as
well. Is it God that justifies
who will accuse ? Is it Christ
who intercedes that will condemn ?
On the one side are ranged perse
cution, and famine, and sword, and
nakedness ; on the other, the love
of Christ, from which nothing
in heaven or earth, or the changes
of life or death, can us part.
Compare Is. 1. 8, 9., the thought
of which words seems to be
passing before the Apostle s
mind : OTI iyyi^Ei 6 ^iKatuxrac HE
rig o KpivofjiEvog /J.OL ; avnorr/rw
fj.01 ajUCf KCLl TIQ O KpU OpEVOg JUOt /
Eyyiffaru) /zof lov Kvpiog
JJ.OI Tig KCLKit)(JL JJ.E ; K* T. X.
og yerov 23/ov vtov OUK
Itiiov is used as a term of endear
ment ; as in John, iii. 16., it is said
. " God so loved the world that
he gave his only-begotten Son."
In ver. 33 35. the chief doubt
relates to the punctuation. The
rhythm of the passage may be
brought out by either of the two
following arrangements :
(1.) 31. El 6 $O VTTEp fjflaJV
rig Ka0 f]jj,u>i ;
32. og ye TOV ifilov vlov OVK
K. r. X. vrwc ov%l KCU
266
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cii. VIII.
crvv
rot TrdvTa
papier erai ; ri9 ey/caXe cret, Kara 33
0OV ; 0O9 6 8iKaLa)V ; T19 O KCLTaKpLVtoV 1 ; 34
[ 1770-01)9] 6 aTTo6ava>v, paXXov Se 2 eye/)#ei9, 09
[^Acal] eo-ru> iv Sefta rov ^cov, 09 Kal evrvyyavti VTrep
^Xti//t9 T^ o~TVo^ojpl>a rj Si(yy/jCO9 T^ Xiju,o9 T^ yvjJLVOTrjs
77 p^d^aipa ; KaOcos yeypaTrraL ort evtKtv crov 36
a 0X771^ TT)^ 77/xepa^, eXoyto-^/xez/ a>9 TrpdySara
clXX a TOVT019 iracriv vTTtpviKu>iL*v Sta TOT) 37
TrtTreiO p.aL yap ort ovre Odvaros 33
oure ^0)77, ovre ayyeXoi ovre cl^ai 3 , ovre e^ecrrwra ovre
, oure Sv^ct/^et9 oure vi//aj/>ia oure /3d0os ovre ri9 39
erepa Sv^crerat 77^0,9 ytopicroLi CCTTO T779
TOU ^eov 77^9 ei^ ^pto-raj 9 l7jo~ov TO* Kvpicp rj^
3 o^re
avrw
ra Travra
33.
34. r/c o
6 a7ro0aj wv K. r. X. =
35.
arro TTJQ
$\~i\^tg r)
rtc
uyaTrr/c ro
orej o^wp/a, c. r. X.
(2.) Differs in the arrange
ment of verses 33, 34. by making
the latter clauses questions :
Who shall lay anything to the
charge of God s elect?
Is it God that justifies?
Who is he that will condemn ?
Is it Christ who died and in
tercedes for us?
The last mode which agrees
with the text of Lachmann is
adopted in the following remarks
as the more pointed and forcible.
33. Who shall lay anything to
the charge of God s elect? Is
God who justifies, their accuser?
Does he justify and accuse at
once ? It were a contradiction
to suppose this.
34. Who is he that condemn-
eth? Is the condemner Christ
who ever lives to intercede for
us ? Comp. Heb. vii. 25., " Who
ever liveth to make intercession
for us;" and 1 John, ii. 1., "We
have an advocate with the Fa
ther."
6 aTTodavuv, who died, or more
truly rose again, of whom we
now speak rather as of one passed
into the heavens. The words
paXXov $c, or judAXoy e KCU, fur
ther intimate the inconsistency
of Christ condemning us, not
only because he died for us, but
also, which is an additional rea
son, because he rose again " for
our justification," iv. 25. ; and
what is a yet further reason,
because he is oar advocate.
35. T IQ better than r/, as a con
tinuation of the questions : Who
shall separate us from the love of
Christ ? Who shall make us give
VER. 33-39.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
267
how shall he not with him also freely give us all
33 things ? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God s
34 elect? Shall* God that justifieth? Who is he that
will condemn? 1 Will Christ that died, 2 rather, that
is risen again, who is also at the right hand of God, who
35 also maketh intercession for us ? Who shall separate
us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress,
or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or
36 sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are killed
all the day long: we are accounted as sheep for the
37 slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than
ss conquerors through him that loved us. For I am per
suaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor
principalities, nor things present, nor things to come,
39 nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other crea
ture, shall be able to separate us from the love of God,
which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
1 That condemneth.
up Christ, or Christ give up us ?
Not afflictions of any sort. In
verses 34. and 39. Christ s love
to us, rather than ours to Him,
seems spoken of; in ver. 35. ours
towards Him. Yet there is no
occasion, in either place, to sepa
rate one from the other. We
love Him as we are loved of
Him : we know Him as we are
known of Him.
36. The quotation is taken lite
rally from the LXX. Ps. xli v.22.
37. aXX kv TOVTOIQ Trdfft.] We
conquer far through his love to
us.
38. For I am persuaded that
neither life, nor death, nor evil
angels, nor principalities, nor
things present nor future, nor
powers, nor the height of heaven,
nor depths of hell, nor any other
created thing, can separate us
from the love of Christ.
2 Add yea.
To ask the exact meaning of
each of these words, would be
like asking the precise meaning
of single expressions in the line
of Milton :
" Thrones, dominations, princedoms, virtues,
powers."
The leading thought in the
Apostle s mind is that "nothing
ever at any time or place can
separate us from the love of
Christ." Of the signification of
the particular words we can only
form a notion, by attempting to
conceive the invisible world, as
it revealed itself by the eye of
faith to the Apostle s mind, as
inward, and yet outward ; as pre
sent, and yet future ; as earthly,
and yet heavenly. Compare 1
Peter, iii. 22.: OQ kanv iv Seia
TOV 0oi), Tropevdelg eiQ ovpat ov VTTO-
avru) ayylXwv Kill i,o\)-
/cat
268 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
CHAP. IX. XL
THE chapters that have preceded have been connected with each
other by a sort of network, some of the threads of which have never
ceased or been intermitted. At this point we come to a break in the
Epistle. What follows has no connexion with what immediately
precedes. The sublime emotion with which chapter viii. concludes
is in another strain from that with which chapter ix. opens. We
might almost imagine that the Apostle had here made a pause, and
only after a while resumed his work of dictating to " Tertius who
wrote this Epistle." It is on a more extended survey of the whole
that order begins to reappear, and we see that the subject now intro
duced, which was faintly anticipated at the commencement of the
third chapter, has also an almost necessary place in the Apostle s
scheme.
The three chapters IX. XL have been regarded by an eminent
critic as containing the true germ and first thought of the Epistle.
Such a view may be supported by various arguments. It may be
said that a letter must arise out of circumstances, and that this por
tion of the Epistle only has an appropriate subject ; that we can
imagine the Apostle, though unknown by face to the Church which
was at Rome, writing to Jewish Christians on a topic in which they,
as well as he, were so deeply interested as the restoration of their
countrymen ; but that we cannot imagine him sitting down to com
pose a treatise on justification by faith ; that to explain the deal
ings of God with his people, it was necessary for him to go back to
the first principles of the Gospel of Christ, and that this mode of
overlaying and transposing what to us would seem the natural order
EPISTLE TO THE EOMANS. 269
of thought is quite in accordance with his usual manner. (Com
pare, e. g. the structure of I Cor. x.) It may be urged, that in seve
ral passages,, as, for example, at the commencement of the third and
fourth chapters, he has already hinted at the maintenance of the
privileges of the Jews. All such arguments, ably as they have been
stated by Baur, yet fail to convince us that what is apparently pro
minent and on the surface, and also occupies the greater part of the
Epistle, is really subordinate, and that what is apparently subordi
nate and supplementary, held the first place in the Apostle s thoughts.
See Introduction.
The theory of Baur is, however, so far true, as it tends to bring into
prominence, as a main subject of the Epistle, the admission of the
Gentiles. To the Apostle himself and his contemporaries, this was
half, or more than half, the whole truth, not less striking or absorb
ing than the other half, of " righteousness by faith only." It is with
this aspect of the doctrine of St. Paul that the portion of the Epistle
on which we are now entering is to be connected. " Is he the God
of the Jews only ? is he not also of the Gentiles ? Yes, of the Gen
tiles also." But granting this, innumerable difficulties and perplexi
ties arose in the mind of the Israelites or of the reader of the Old
Testament. What is the meaning of a chosen people ? What advan
tage hath the Jew ? and above all, what is to be his final end ? When
the circle of God s mercy is extended to the whole world, is he to be
the only exception ? Thrice the Apostle essays to answer this ques
tion ; thrice he turns aside, rather to justify God s present dealings in
casting away His chosen, than to hold out the hope with which he
concludes, that all Israel shall be saved.
We have seen elsewhere (chap. iii. 1 8., v. 12 21.,vii.7 11.) that
in many passages the Apostle wavers between the opposite sides of a
question, before he arrives at a final and permanent conclusion. The
argument in such passages may be described as a sort of struggle in his
own thoughts, an alternation of natural feelings, a momentary conflict
of emotions. The stream of discourse flows onward in two channels,
occasionally mingling or con tending with each other, which meet at the
270 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
last. There are particular instances of this peculiarity of style in the
chapters which follow, ix. 19., x. 14. But the most striking illustration
of it is the general character of the whole three chapters, in which
the Apostle himself seems for a time in doubt between contending
feelings, in which he first prays for the restoration of Israel, and then
reasons for their rejection, and then finally shows that in a more
extended view of the purposes of God their salvation is included. He
hears the echo of many voices in the Old Testament, by which the
Spirit spoke to the Fathers, and in all of them there is a kind of unity,
though but half expressed, which is not less the unity of his own
inmost feelings towards his kinsmen according to the flesh. He is
like one of the old prophets himself, abating nothing of the rebel
lions of the house of Israel, yet still unable to forget that they are
the people of God. As an Israelite and a believer in Christ, he is full
of sorrow first, of consolation afterwards ; two opposite feelings
struggle together in his mind, both finally giving way to a clearer
insight into the purposes of God towards the chosen nation.
When the first burst of his emotion has subsided, he proceeds to
show that the rejection of Israel was not total, but partial, and that
this partial rejection is in accordance with the analogy of God s deal
ings with their fathers. The circle of God s mercy to them had ever
been narrowing. First, the seed of Abraham was chosen ; then Isaac
only ; then Jacob before Esau, and this last quite irrespective of any
good or evil that either of them had done. There was a preference
in each case of the spiritual over the fleshly heir. Shall we say that
here is any ground for imputing unrighteousness to God ? He Him
self had proclaimed this as His mode of dealing with mankind. The
words of the law are an end of controversy. He does it, therefore it
is just ; he tells it us, therefore it is true. Who are we that we should
call in question His justice, or challenge His ways ? The clay might
as well reason with the potter, as man argue against God. And, after
all, this election of some to wrath, others to mercy, is but justice in
mercy delayed, or an alternation of mercy and justice. The rejection
of the Jews is the admission of the Gentiles. And to this truth the
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 271
prophets themselves bear witness. They speak of " a remnant," of
"another people," of "a cutting short upon the earth," of "a rock
of offence." The work that God has done is nothing unjust or unex
pected, but a work of justice and mercy upon the house of Israel,
of which their own prophets witness ; of which they are themselves
the authors, as they sought to establish their own righteousness,
and rejected the righteousness that is of faith.
But the subject of God s dealings with the Jews is not yet finished ;
it is, indeed, scarcely begun. The first verses of the ninth chapter
gave an intimation that this would not be the final course of the Apo
stle s thought. Israel had sought to establish their own righteousness,
and rejected the righteousness that was of faith. But this very rejec
tion, which was their condemnation, was not without excuse, in that
it arose from a mistaken zeal for God. That mistake consisted in
their not perceiving the difference between the righteousness of
the law and the righteousness of faith ; the one a strait and un
bending rule ; the other, " very nigh, even in thy mouth and thy
heart," and extending to all mankind, " But," we expect the Apo
stle to say at the end of the contrast, " notwithstanding this, Israel
may yet be saved." The time for this is not yet come. In what
follows, to the end of the chapter, he digresses more and more ; first,
as at ver. 14 19. of the previous one, to state the objections of the
Jew ; secondly, to show that those objections are of no weight, and
are disproved by the words of their own prophets.
Nowhere does the logical control over language, that is, the power
of aptly disposing sentences so as to exhibit them in their precise rela
tion to each other, so fail the Apostle as at the conclusion of the tenth
chapter. We see his meaning, but his emotions prevent him from
expressing it. At the commencement of the eleventh chapter, finding
that he is so far away from his original subject, he makes an effort to
regain it. "Hath God then cast away his people ?" The Apostle is
himself a living proof that this is not so. Though Israel " hath not
obtained it," the elect, who are part of Israel, who are the true Israel,
have obtained it. The fall of the rest is but for a time, and is itself
272 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
an argument for their final restoration. The rejection of the Jews is
the admission of the Gentiles, and the admission of the Gentiles comes
round in the end to be the restoration of the Jews. And besides,
and beneath all this, amid these alternations of thought and vicis
situdes of human things, there is an immutable foundation on which
we rest in the promises of God to Israel. The friend of the patriarchs
cannot forget their children ; the Unchangeable cannot desert the
work of His hands.
VOL. II.
274
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cir. IX.
Xeyo) Iv
- 9
OTL \V7rrj fJioi i<TTiv fJieyaXrj Kal dSiaXeiTrros oSvvrj rrj 2
KapSia fjiov r^v^o^v yap avdOepa elvai avros e y&&gt; x a/7ro 3
rou xpicrTov vTTep T&v dSeX^xSi jitov, raw crvyye^ajz/ ^cou
Kara cra/o/ca, otrweg eicru> Icr/m^XiTai, 5i> 17 vlo0cria Kal rj 4
eli/at.
IX. 1. aXrjdftav Xe yw, / say
Me fr-wM.] In the language of St.
Paul, everything that the Chris
tian is and does is said "to be
in Christ." Christ is the element
in which his soul moves, as he
says in Gal. ii. 20. : " Yet not I,
but Christ within me." To speak
the truth in Christ is not a form
of adjuration, but an expression
of the same kind as "to be in
Christ."
ffvpfjiapTvpovffrjG f.ioi TfJQ avret-
//<r<o, my conscience witnesses
that I speak the truth. ] Comp.
ii. 15., "Who show the work of
the law written on their hearts,
their conscience also bearing them
witness;" andviii. 16., "The Spi
rit itself also beareth witness with
our spirit that we are the children
of God." So here conscience
witnesses to the truth of his
words, but it is a conscience
which passes out of itself, and
is identified and lost in the Spirit
of God.
It may be asked why should
St. Paul asseverate with such
warmth what no one would doubt
or deny. Such is his manner in
other passages, as in Gal. i. 20.,
" Now the things which I write
unto you, behold, before God, I lie
not ; " although the things that he
wrote merely related to his jour
neys to Jerusalem. But there
was a matter behind, which was
of vital importance to himself
and the church, viz. his claim to
independence of the other Apo
stles. Hence the strong feeling
which he shows. Compare also
2 Cor. xi. 31.: "The God and
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ
knoweth that I lie not ; " viz. in
the narrative of his sufferings.
So here the intensity of his lan
guage expresses only the strength
of his feelings, not the suspicion
that any one would doubt his
words. In the first part of the
Epistle it might perhaps have
been argued that he had lost
sight of his own people ; he re
turns to them with a burst of
affection.
2. No such ties ever bound to
gether any other nation of the
world, as united the Jews. Pa
triotism is a word too weak to
express the feeling with which
they clung to their country, to
their law and their God. And St.
Paul himself, although, to use his
own words, "his bowels had been
enlarged" to include the Gentiles,
comes back to the feelings of his
youth, as with the vehemence of
a first love. He sorrows over his
people, like the prophets of old,
not without an example in the
Saviour himself, Luke, xix. 42. :
"If thou hadst known, even thou,
at least in this thy day, the things
which belong unto thy peace! but
now they are hid from thine eyes."
3. Great ingenuity has been
VER. 14.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
275
9 I SAY the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also
2 bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, that I have great
3 heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. For I
could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for
4 my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh : who
are Israelites ; whose * is the adoption, and the glory,
exercised to evade the natural
meaning of this verse, in conse
quence of the supposed impiety
of St. Paul s devotion of himself
to everlasting damnation. Hence
the words avadefj-a OTTO TOV \P L ~
ffrov have been regarded as signi
fying " set apart by Christ," in
violation both of grammar and
sense, smdrjv^oprjv has been made
to refer to the state of the Apostle
before his conversion, " For I
used to pray that I might be
what I now call anathema from
Christ." To such expedients the
interpreter is obliged to resort,
when he begins by laying down
the principle that St. Paul could
not have bartered his eternal
salvation for the good of others.
This is the error of " rhetoric
turned logic ; " that is to say, the
error of explaining the language
of feeling, as though it were that
of reasoning and reflection. The
Apostle is not thinking of everlast
ing damnation. He means only
to express in the strongest man
ner his affection for his kinsmen,
and his willingness to make any
sacrifice, if he might save some of
them. As Moses says, Exod.
xxxii. 32. " Blot me, O Lord,
out of the book that thou hast
written;" as David says, 2 Sam.
xviii. 33. "Would God I had
died for thee, my son, my son ; " so
St. Paul, absorbed in a single feel
ing, and hardly considering the
strength of his own words, is for a
moment willing to be accursed
from Christ, that he might be
exchanged for them ; an impos
sible prayer it may be, but to be
regarded only as an instance of
the devoted love and zeal of the
Apostle.
IffparjXiTai.^ The name re
fers us back to the Father of the
Jewish race, who was called Israel,
that is, Striver with God, by God
Himself, Gen. xxxii. 28. Comp.
xi. 1., also 2 Cor. xi. 22. : "Are
they Hebrews ? so am I. Are
they Israelites ? so am I. Are
they the seed of Abraham ? so
am I ; " and Acts, xxii. 3.
4. >/ viodeffia.^ Comp. Deut. xiv.
1. : "Ye are the children of
the Lord your God ; " and for a
contrast, Gal. iv. 1. : "But I
say that the heir, so long as he is
a child, differeth nothing from a
servant, though he be Lord of all."
The sonship of the Israelite
has sometimes been contrasted
with the sonship of the believer,
as an external with a spiritual
adoption. The one had the name
of son ; the other the feeling
whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
In this passage, however, no such
opposition is justified, because
the Apostle is speaking of the
adoption of the Israelite in
its first idea and origin
" whose great privilege it was
to be called the sons of God,"
whose was the Shechinah, or
visible presence of God, the
T 2
276
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cu. IX.
Sofa Kal rj
Kal 17 vo^oOecrLa, Kal rj Xarpeta Kal at
en-ayyeXtat, a>z/ ot Trarepes, /cat Ig >v 6 ypUTTos TO /cara 5
6 &v e-rrl Travrw 0eos ev^oyrjTos et? rovs ataW?.
olov Se 6V t e/c7re7rra)/cei> 6 Xoyos rou #eo. ou 6
cu 5ta0f)/ccu.
" angel of his presence," as it is
termed in other passages. Comp.
the expression: 6 $eog rijg o
Acts, vii. 2. ; 6 Trim/p r/je
Eph. i. 17. ; ytpovGiii r >fe
Heb. ix. 5. ; also, 2 Cor. iii. 7.,
where Soa is used for the glory
on Moses face,which is contrasted
with the higher glory of the new
dispensation; also its use in Rom.
iii. 23., v. 2., where, as elsewhere,
it is applied to the glorified state
of which the believer is hereafter
to be a partaker.
fj \arpeia. ] The service of the
temple and tabernacle.
fTrayycXmt.] Coinp. Rom. XV.
8., at tTrayyeXmi rfov Trarepwv
in Gal. iii. 16. opposed to the law.
5. <3j> 01 Trarepe c.] To whom be
long Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
whose God is the God of Israel.
Comp. Exod. iii. 13.: "The
God of your fathers hath sent
me unto you."
TO Kara ffap/ca.] Comp. 1 3.
o wv 7rt Trnj rwj , who is over
all.~\ It is a question to which
we can hardly expect to get an
answer unbiased by the inter
ests of controversy, whether the
clause, 6 &v e-rrl iravTiov Stbg tv-
Xoyrjroc ftg rove cuwvctc, is to be
referred to Christ, " of whom is
Christ according to the flesh,
who is God over all blessed for
ever ; " or, as in Lachmann, to be
separated from the preceding
words and regarded as a doxo-
logy to God the Father, uttered
by the Apostle, on a review of
God s mercy to the Jewish people.
The emendations of the text,
such as the suppression of Scoe,
and the inversion of 6 wv into
&v b, have no authority. Neither
can tradition be of any real
value, except so far as it pre
serves to us some fact or mean
ing of a word which we should
not otherwise have known. Where
it is repugnant to the style and
phraseology of an author, it is
in error ; where it agrees with
them, it hardly affords any ad
ditional confirmation.
Against those who refer the
ambiguous clause to God and
not to Christ it is argued :
(1.) That the doxology thus
inserted in the midst of the
text is unmeaning.
(2.) That here, as in Rom.
i. 3., the words fcarct trapKa
need some corresponding clause
expressive of the exaltation of
Christ.
(3.) That the grammar is de
fective and awkward.
It is replied to the first ob
jection, that the introduction of
such doxologies in the midst of
a sentence is common in Jewish
writers. See Schoettgen on 2
Cor. xi. 31., though the passages
there quoted do not justify the
abrupt introduction of the doxo
logy where the name of God has
not preceded.
To the second it is answered,
that St. Paul is not here con
trasting the humiliation and ex-
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
277
VER. 5, 6.]
and the covenant 1 , and the giving of the law, and the
5 service of God, and the promises ; whose are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came. God,
6 who is over all, is* blessed for ever. Amen. Not as
1 Covenants.
altation of Christ, which would
be out of place in this passage,
but simply declaring the fact that
"Messiah was of the Jews."
To the third, which is the
strongest objection, that the omis
sion of the verb is usual in such
formulas :
Itmay be added : (1.) That the
language here applied to Christ is
stronger than that used elsewhere,
even in the strongest passages ;
Titus, ii. 13. (1 Tim. iii. 16.,
where OQ, and not 0eoe, is the true
reading) ; Col. ii. 9.
Had St. Paul ever spoken
of Christ as God, he would many
times have spoken of him as
such, not once only and that by
accident.
(2.) That in other places the
Apostle speaks of one God, as in
1 Cor. viii. 4., Eph. iv. 6., and in 1
Tim. ii. 5., of one God and one
Mediator between God and man.
(3.) That nearly the same ex
pression, 6 wr . . . evXoyriTog EIQ rove
cuwi ae, occurs also in 2 Cor. xi.
31. ; but that it is applied, not to
Christ himself, but to " the God
and Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ." So in Rom. i. 25.
(4.) That the introduction of
the doxology, if it be referred to
Christ, is too abrupt a transi
tion, in a passage the purport of
which is, not to honour Christ,
but to recount the glories of the
Jewish race, in the passionate re
membrance of which the Apostle
is carried on to the praises of God.
(5.) That in the phraseology
of St. Paul, Kara crapKa is not
naturally contrasted with -Seoe,
but always with l eTrayyeAtctf,
Kara Trrevfjia, and is often used
without contrast.
(6.) That the word ei/Xoyijroe,
is referred in the New Testament
(as the corresponding word in
Hebrew) exclusively to God the
Father, and not to Christ. Mark,
xiv. 61.; Luke, i. 68.; Rom. i. 25.
Patristic authority is in favour
of referring the words in dispute
to Christ. Wetstein has led him
self and others into error, by as
suming that the fathers who
denied that the predicate 6 ini
TrdvTwv 6eoe could be applied to
Christ, would have refused to ap
ply to Him the modified form,
6 ajv iir\ TravTtov Oeog. The evi
dence of Iren. adv. Haer. iii.
16. 3.; Tertull. adv. Prax. 13.;
Origen and Theodoret on this
passage ; Athanasius, Hilary, and
Cyril (Chrysostom is uncertain),
shows clearly the manner of read
ing the words in the third or
fourth century. But the testi
mony of the third century can
not be set against that of the
first, that is, of parallel passages
in St. Paul himself.
According to a third way of
taking the passage, the words
(> &v 7ri TravTwv are separated
from the remainder of the clause,
" of whom came Christ, according
to the flesh, who is over all ;"
upon which follows the doxology
T 3
278
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. IX.
yap Trvres o
on eicr>
Icr/m^X, OVTOL icrpaTjX*
7rdi>Tes TCKVOL, dXX *E
croi cnrepfjia. Tovrtcmv, ov ra re/c^a TT^S crapKog, ravra 8
refc^a rov Oeov, clXXa ra Te/a>a rrjs eTrayyeXias Xoyierai
cis cnrepfjia. eVayyeXtas yap 6 Xoyos o5rog, Kara TOJ> 9
Kaipov TOVTOV eXevcro/^ai KCU ecrrai rij Sdppa vtd?. ou 10
Se, dXXct Acal e Pe/3e/c/ca e eVos KOIT^V fyovcra
as the conclusion of the whole :
" God is blessed for ever."
6. For the construction com
pare Phil. iv. 11., OVK OTL Katf
vvTEprjffiv Xt ya*. In the present
passage, ov)( o\ov $e = ov TOLOVTOV
Se Xeyw oiov on iKTrlTrruKev b
\6yOQ TOV S fOU.
For the meaning compare the
beginning of the third chapter :
" For what if some did not be
lieve ; that makes no difference
in the steadfastness and truth of
God." So here : "The Jews are
the heirs of all the promises, and
yet the word of God has not
failed. For the promises were
made only to the true Israel."
And " He is not a Jew who is
one outwardly, nor is that circum
cision which is outward in the
flesh."
7 13. Two lines of argument
run through the following pas
sage: (1.) There was a spiritual
as well as a fleshly heir. (2.)
God chose according to his own
free will, anvu irmv aXXrjyopov-
peva, the history of the patri
archs is a figure of the Gospel.
7. oi>(? OTL Eifflv airipfjia., nei
ther because they are the seed.~]
The Apostle had just said, that
not every Israelite was an Is
raelite indeed. Here he repeats
the same thing. The Old Testa
ment used the word ^Xrjdrjfferat,
in speaking of the seed of Isaac :
" In Isaac shall thy seed be
called ;" meaning that the line
of Isaac shall be called by the
name " seed of Abraham." To
this word (cX^0i/<Tfrai) the Apo
stle here gives an evangelical
sense, as he did to \oy/o/zcu, in
chap. iv. The restriction of the
promises to the seed of Isaac
seemed to him exactly to repre
sent what was taking place before
his eyes.
8. roiTt ortv, that is.~] The
meaning of this is, that the chil
dren of the promise, not the chil
dren of the flesh, are the seed of
God. The contrast is carried
out further in Rom. iv. and Gal.
iv. There were many circum
stances that marked Isaac out as
the type of the spiritual. He
was (like the Gentile) born out
of due time ; he was the true
heir of the promises, the son, not
of the bondwoman, but of the
free.
The promise is the anticipation
of the Gospel. It is in the Old
Testament what grace and for
giveness are in the New. Com
pare Gal. iii. 18., Rom.iv. 13, 14.
In the passage which follows
the Apostle is speaking, accord
ing to the Calvinist interpreter,
of absolute, according to his op
ponents, of conditional predesti
nation. The first urges that he
is referring to individuals ; the
VER. 7-10.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
279
though the word of God hath failed.* For they arc
7 not all Israel, which are of Israel : neither, because they
are the seed of Abraham, are they all children : but, In
Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are
s the children of the flesh, these are not the children of
God : but the children of the promise are counted for
a * seed. For this is the word of promise, At this time
9 will I come, and Sarah shall have a son. And not only
10 this ; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even
second, to nations; the first dwells
on the case of Pharaoh, as stated
by the Apostle ; the second returns
to the language of the Old Testa
ment, which says not only " the
Lord hardened Pharaoh s heart,"
but " Pharaoh hardened his own
heart." The former, it has been
observed, takes chap. ix. separate
from chap. x. and xi., which speak,
not merely of the rejection, but
of the sins of Israel ; while the
latter confines his view to chap.
x. and xi., and appears to do away
with the election of God in chap.
ix.
What we aim at in modern
times in the consideration of such
questions is "consistency ;" and
the test which we propose to
ourselves of the truth of their
solution, is whether they involve
a contradiction in terms. No
thing can be more unlike the mode
in which the Apostle conceives
them, which is not logical at all.
Sometimes he is overpowered by
the goodness and mercy of God ;
at other times he is filled with
a sense of the deservedness of
man s lot ; now, as we should say,
for predestination, now for free
will ; at one time only forbidding
man to arraign the justice of God,
and at another time asserting it.
Logically considered, such oppos
ing aspects of things are incon
sistent. But they are true prac
tically ; they are what we have
all of us felt at different times,
and are not more contradictory
than the different phases of
thought and feeling which we ex
press in conversation. There are
two views of these subjects, a phi
losophical and a religious one : the
first balancing and systematising
them and seeking to form a whole
of speculative truth ; the latter
partial and fragmentary, speak
ing to the heart and feelings of
man. The latter is that of the
Apostle.
9. For the word of promise is
that which speaks particularly of
the son who was to be born to
Sarah.
10 ov /jiovov tte .] And not only
so ; there is the yet stronger case
of Jacob and Esau, who were the
legitimate sons of Isaac and Re
becca. The words aXXci icae Pe-
&KKa have no verb ; the
struction being changed
ai/rjj in ver. 12.
e f.voQ.~\ tie here unemphati-
cally, for TIQ, as with substan
tives, Matt. viii. 19., and else
where. To make a contrast be
tween the one husband of Rebecca
con
T 4
280
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. IX.
\ i
TOV
TOV Trarpos fjiJiwv py wo) yap yevvrjOtvTuv /r^Se TT/oaf d
TL ayaOov rj (f)av\ov l , Iva 07 KOLT K\oyrjv 2 TrpoBe
6eov pevy, OVK l epyuv dXX e/c TOV /caXoiWos, IppeOrj 12
avTrj OTL 6 pti&v SovXevaei TU e XdVcrow, KaOa>s yeypaTTTcu, 13
Tov laKajfi rjydTrrjo-a, TOP Se Hcrav l^io-rjo-a.
TL ovv ipovpev ; JUT) dSi/aa Trapd TQ> 0<S ; ///*) yeVoiro. u
ra> Mojorfj yap 3 Xeyet, EXeTycra) ov az/ eXew, Acai oi/cretp^ora) 15
oz cU> oiKTtipa). dpa ovv ov TOV 6kovTO<$ ouSe rov r/oe- 16
^o^TO5, dXXa rou eXew^ro? 0eov. Xeyet yap 17 ypa^rj T( 17
$apaa) STL ecs auro rovro e^rfyeipd ere, OTTO)? eV
croi
w p^ov Kal OTTCU? SiayyeXiJ TO 6Vo//,a /xov e
KO.K6V.
and the two wives of Abraham is
ridiculous.
It is characteristic of Jewish
history that the younger is pre
ferred to the elder. "And not
only this," we might say with the
Apostle, " but Ephraim, and Mo
ses, and David, and Samuel, and
Abraham himself" were all in
stances of the same preference.
11. The Apostle expressly
points to the fact from which we
should naturally have withdrawn
our minds, that as it were to
preserve the prerogative of God
intact, the election of Jacob took
place, before there could be any
ground for favour arising out of
the actions of either. It was not
of works, though in this case it
could not be of faith, but of Him
that calleth.
f] Kar c*;Xoy)}> 7Tj0000-tg.] The
purpose of God according to
election, that is, the purpose of
God irrespective of men s actions
(comp. ol Kara TrpoQeffiv K\r)roi,
viii. 28.). plvr] refers either to
the establishment of the belief in
election, " might stand firm and
be acknowledged ; " or merely to
the firmness of the Divine pur
pose. Comp. Heb. xii. 27.
12. Gen. xxv. 23. Where,
however, the words (which are
here exactly quoted from the
LXX.) refer not to Jacob and
Esau, but to the two nations
who were to spring from them.
13. These words are exactly
quoted from the LXX., with a
very slight alteration in their
order. Their meaning must be
gathered from the connexion of
the Apostle s argument, not from
any preconceived notion of the
attributes of God. In the pro
phet (Mai. i. 2, 3.) God is intro
duced as reproaching Israel for
their ingratitude to Him, though
he had " loved Jacob and hated
Esau." Here no stress is to be
laid on the words "loved" and
" hated," which are poetical
figures, the thought expressed by
them being subordinate to the
prophet s main purpose. It is
otherwise in the quotation ; there
the point is that God preferred one,
and rejected another of his own
free will. As of old, he preferred
Jacob, so now he may reject him.
VER. 1117.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
281
11 by our father Isaac ; for the children being not yet
born, neither having done any good or evil, that the
purpose of God according to election might stand, not
12 of works, but of him that calleth : it was said unto her,
13 that * the elder shall serve the younger. As it is written,
Jacob* I loved, but Esau* I hated.
u What shall we say then ? Is there not* unrighteous-
15 ness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I
will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will
is have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So
then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that run-
17 neth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the scripture
saith unto Pharaoh, that * for this same purpose I have
raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and
Any further inference from the
unconditional predestination of
nations to that of individuals,
does not come within the Apostle s
range of view.
14, 15. What shall we say
then ? is not God unjust for this
arbitrary election ? The Apostle
answers the objection which he
himself suggests by an appeal to
the book of the law, as the end
of all controversy. " So far from
being unjust, it is the very rule
of action which God announces
to Moses." Beyond this circle,
he does not at this time advance.
Yet the three chapters taken to
gether imply a further answer.
The quotation is from Ex.
xxxiii. 19., taken word for word
from the LXX. It refers in the
original passage to the favour
shown by God to Moses when
he made " his glory to pass be
fore him."
16. And so it is proved, not
that God is unjust, but that man
neither wills, nor does, and that
all is the work of Divine mercy.
17. The Apostle passes on to
a yet stronger instance in which
God raised up a monument, not
of his mercy, but of his ven
geance.
The quotation must be inter
preted with a reference to the
connexion, and not with a view
to the refutation of Calvinistic
excesses. And the connexion
requires, not that "God per
mitted Pharaoh s heart to be
hardened," or that " Pharaoh
hardened his own heart," but
that "God hardened Pharaoh s
heart." The words do not pre
cisely agree with the LXX., in
which the first is changed into
the second person. Exod. ix.
16.:
TO ova^a pov i
ar) TIJ y.
For ^ierr)pii6r]Q the Apostle
substitutes the stronger expres
sion l^yttjoa, which agrees with
the Hebrew in the person, though
neither SierrjpridrjQ (thou wast pre
served alive), nor c/yjua (raised
282
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
. IX.
Trj yfj. apa ovv ov 0e Xei eXeet, bv oe $eXei O~K\T]- is
pvvti. Iptts IJLOL ovv Ti ovv en l /xe/^ercu ; rw yap fiov- 19
X^art avTov ri<$ avOecrTyKev ; a> av0pa)7T, ptvovv ye 2 2 o
crv rts el 6 avTCLTTOKpivoiJievos ra> #ew ; prj Iptt TO 7rXacr//,a
ra> TrXacraz Ti Ti pe liroiTjcras oimos; ^ OVK e)(et e^ovcriav 21
6 Kepafjicvs TOV 7777X01), IK TOV OLVTOV ^vpd^aro^ Troirjcrcu
o ptv ets TijJirjv cr/cevo?, o 8e ets anp,iav ; el Se OeXwv 6 22
#eos eVSet^acr^at, r^ opyrjv Kal yvcopicrat, TO SVVOLTOV avTov
thee up,, brought thee into exist
ence), is an exact translation of
the word used, which means
" made to stand, established."
18. In the word aK\r)pvvEi,
"hardens," a trace again appears
of the Old Testament narrative
respecting Pharaoh. Compare
Exodus, ix. 12., i(TK\r]pvve Kvpiog
T)}I> Kaptilav 4>ctpaw. ix. 34., $apaw
O.VTOV rrjv Kapdiav. 35.,
i] K ap^/a 4>apaw. The
inference is drawn partly from
the word l^yeipo, but chiefly
from the clause that follows :
The words in which God speaks
of raising up Pharaoh, to display
his power in him, are a proof that
lie does what He will with His
creatures.
Can we avoid the fatal conse
quence that God is here regarded
as the author of evil ? It may be
replied that throughout the pas
sage St. Paul is speaking, not of
himself, but in the language of
the Old Testament, the line drawn
in which is not precisely the same
with that of the New, though
we cannot separate them with
philosophical exactness. It was
not always a proverb in . the
house of Israel, that " God tempt
ed no man." In the overpower
ing sense of the Creator s being,
the free agency of the creature
was lost, and it seemed to the
external spectator as if the evil
that men did, was but the just
punishment that he inflicted on
them for their sins. Comp. Ezek.
xiv. 9.
The portions of the New Tes
tament which borrow the lan
guage or the Spirit of the Old
must not be isolated from other
passages, which take a more
comprehensive view of the deal
ings of God with man. God
tempts no man to evil who has
not first tempted himself. This
is the uniform language of both
Old and New Testament ; the
difference seems to lie in the
circumstance that in the Old Tes
tament, God leaves or gives a
man to evil who already works
evil, while the prevailing tone of
the New Testament is that evil
in all its stages is the work of
man himself. (See Essay on the
Contrasts of Prophecy, at the
end of chap, xi.)
19. Again, as in the 3rd chap
ter, human nature seems to rise
up against so severe a statement
of the attributes of God. We
trace the indistinct sense of the
great question of the origin of
evil : ri eri /otyw w ajuaprwXoe
Kplvoftdt ; iii. 7.
Tt ovv HTL jLejL()eTaL ; The
VER. 18-22.J
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
283
that my name might be declared throughout all the
is earth. So * then he hath mercy on whom he will, and
19 whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto
me, Why then 1 doth he yet find fault? For who hath
20 resisted his will ? Nay rather, man, who art thou
that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say
to him that formed it, Why hast thou made ine thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same
lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto
22 dishonour?* And if God, willing to shew his wrath,
Om. then.
thought will insinuate itself into
the soul that He who can pre
vent, ought not to punish evil.
But such thoughts must be put
down with a strong hand.
20. perovv ye, nay but,"] is
used to corrector oppose an asser
tion (Rom. x. 18. ; Luke, xi. 18.),
as in classical writers, though in
the latter not placed at the be
ginning of a sentence. The an
swer to the objection is of the
same kind as at ver. 15. : " Rather
O man, who art thou to bandy
words with God ? " Without
maintaining the justice of God,
the Apostle denies the right to
impugn it. He appeals to the
single consideration that he is the
Creator. " Shall the thing formed
say to him that formed it, Why
hast thou made me thus ? " He
does not do it, because it is just ;
it is just, because he does it. The
words fj.r) epu down to OVTWQ are
taken, with some verbal altera
tion, from Isaiah, xxix. 16.
21. The conception of God as
the potter, and his creatures as
the clay, occurs in several pas
sages of the Old Testament, as
Jer. xviii. 3 10., where the pro
phet goes down to the potter s
house and sees the vessel which
he had in his hands marred
(ver. 4., Kal 7re<re TO ayyeloi o
avroQ ETroiet ev rnlg ^eparlv avrov
KCU iraXiv avroG tTroirjaev avrb dy-
yeloy trepov), and another vessel
put on the wheel, threatening in
a figure the destruction of Israel;
also in another spirit, Isaiah, Ixiv.
8. : "But now, O Lord, thou
art our Father ; we are the clay
and thou our potter, and we all
are the work of thy hands."
The first of these quotations has
probably suggested the words of
this passage, the second more
nearly resembles the tone of the
following verses, which seem to
say : " We are his, therefore he
has an absolute right over us ;
therefore, also, as we acknowledge
his right over us, will he have
mercy upon us." Compare
Isaiah, xlv. 9.
22. The construction of this
passage involves an anacoluthon.
As in ii. 17., el <$ av Ioi>c)a7og
tTTOj o/ua^r/, there is no apodosis to
ft eJc. The thread of the sentence
is lost in the digression of verses
23, 24, 25. The corresponding
clause should have been, What is
that to thee ? or, Who art thou
284
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[OH. IX.
Iv iro\\fj ^aKpoOv^ia o~Kvrj
ets a7TtoXetaj>, Kal tVa yvcopicry TOV 7r\ovTov TT?S 80^77$ 23
avrov ITT! o~Kvr) eXeous, a Trpoyjroi^acrev ets S6av ; ovs /cat 24
e/caXecrei> ^/x-ag ou ^QVQV ef lovSaicov dXXa /cat ef iOvtov,
fc>9 /cat ez rw /2cr7ye Xeyet KaXecro) TOJ> ov Xao^ /xou Xaw jnov 25
/cat Tr?z> ov/c rjyaTrrjfJLemqv T^yaTn^ez Tp /cat carat e^ TO- 25
Trw o5 eppedrj [avrots] Ou Xads /x,ov u/xet?, e/cet /cX^^cro^rat
vtot ^eou ^<w^ro5. Hcratas 8e /cyoa^et VTrep TOT) *Io-paij\ JBa^ 27
T^ 6 apiOfJibs TMV viwv IcrparjX as 17 a/x,/xos r^s ^aXacrcrTy?,
ro 1 v7rdXetjLt/>ta craj^creTaf Xoyoz^ ya^o crv^reXaj^ /cat crw 28
who hast an answer to God ?
There is, however, a further com
plexity in the passage. The
simple thought would have been
as follows : But if God shows
forth his righteous vengeance on
men, what is that to thee ?
But side by side with this creeps
in another feeling, that even in
justice he remembers mercy.
"He punishes, and you have no
right to find fault with Him for
anything which he does." Still it is
implied that he only punishes those
who ought to have been punished
long before. There would have
been no difficulty in the passage
had the Apostle said: "He
punishes some and spares others."
But he has given a different turn
to the thought " He spares
those whom he punishes." " May
not God," he would say, "be like
the potter dashing in pieces one
vessel, and showing his mercy
to another ; merciful even in the
first, which he puts off as long as
he can, and only executes with
a further purpose of mercy to
others." Se, adver.: " The potter
does this, AND may not God do
it?"
23. ira yvwpfop,] ma j be taken
cither as parallel with i\wv 9 or
with c?3ela90cu, or with
picrai. The last verse implied
that in judgment He remembered
mercy. But now the further pur
pose of God is unfolded, that
mercy should alternate with jus
tice, mercy to the Gentiles,
with judgment on the House of
Israel. As is more explicitly re
peated in chap, xi., the Jew was
rejected that the Gentile might
be received. As in chap. v.
20, 21., or in viii. 3, 4., the two
parts of His work must be taken
as one.
TOV irXovrov TTJg dofyg."^ ()oa is
the glory of God revealed to man.
Compare Eph. iii. 16.; Rom.ii. 4.,
TOV TT\OVTOV riji; xpifffr&ifrog: Col.
1. 11., TO KpaTOQ TTJQ ^O^TJQ O.VTOU
or the still more complicated ex
pression, 6 TrXouroc Trjg
pvffnjplov TOVTOV iv TO~IQ
i. 27. The word TrXouroe occurs
again in Rom.xi. 12., in reference
to the admission of the Gentiles.
So here the thought of ver. 24.,
dXXa Kal e iOv&v is dimly anti
cipated in it.
ovc KCII EKaXeffev >/juac.]| As
which persons He hath also called
(as well as prepared) us. Compare
viii. 30.: cue Trpowpifftv TOVTOVQ KUI
VEK. 23 28.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS,
285
and to make his power known, endured with much long-
23 suffering* vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: and
that he might make known the riches of his glory on
the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared
24 unto glory ? Even us, whom he hath called, not of the
25 Jews only, but also of the Gentiles, as he saith also in
Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my
26 people ; and her beloved, which was not beloved. And
it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said
unto them, Ye are not my people ; there shall they be
27 called the children of the living God. Esaias also crieth
concerning Israel, Though the number of the children
of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be
28 saved. For the Lord will accomplish his word finish-
25, 26. The passages here
quoted from Hosea are as follows
in the LXX.:
ii. 23. : fccu ffirepti CLVTYIV tpavTv
iirl TTJQ yfjc; /ecu aya7rr/<rw rrjv OVK
riyaTrrjfjievrjy KOI low ry ov \au>
/*ov, Aadc pov el ffv.
i. 10.: KOI tcrrat kv T<3 TOTTV ov
eppeQrj avrolQ ov Xaoc pov v/iett:
K\rjdi]ffoi Tai Kal avrot viol Oeov
w) roc. The prophet is speaking
of the rejection and acceptance of
the ten tribes.
In the quotation it is not ne
cessary to give the words kv r$
TOTTW a precise meaning. There
is no point in saying, with some
interpreters, that in Palestine
also the Gentiles should be called
the Sons of God.
27, 28. The quotation is from
Isa. x. 22, 23., and in the Textus
Receptus " agrees almost exactly
with the LXX. The latter verse
is, however, entirely different
from the Hebrew text, the mean
ing of which, according to Gese-
nius and Ewald, is as follows :
" The extermination is deter
mined; it streams forth, bring
ing righteousness, for the Lord
God of Hosts executeth the
appointed destruction in all the
land." The great difference be
tween the Hebrew and the LXX.
is supposed to have arisen from
a mistranslation of Hebrew
words.
It was not only in accordance
with the prophecies of the Old
Testament that Israel should be
rejected. They spoke yet more
precisely of a remnant being
saved. If any one marvelled at
the small number of believers of
Jewish race, it was " written for
their instruction " that " a rem
nant should be saved."
Ho-cuae c).] Se marks the tran
sition to another prophet ; virep
either " respecting " or " over."
28. The two best MSS., A. and
B., omit kv ciKaioffvvr) . . . OVVTET-
uiffjiii QV. As they occur in the
LXX., it may be justly argued
that they are more likely to have
286
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. IX.
Hcrcuas, El /XT) Kvpios era/Bawd ey/careXiTre^ 7jp!u/
WS SoSojJia av eyevTJOrjiJiev Kal a>9 To^oppa av w/xotco #77/^6^.
Ti ow epovpev ; STL Wvr) ra /XT) Siaj/co^ra iKaiocrvv f r)v so
ev Si/catocrwr;^ SiKawcrvvyv Se ryp CK 7rioTea>s,
Se SLWKMV vopov St/catocrw^s eis
ov/c
. Sia ri ; on OVAC CAC Trccrrea)?, dXX a>9 e^ /xya>j> 3 TT^ocre- 32
roi) Trpocr/cd/xjutaro?, /ca^a>s yeypaTrrat, lou 33
\i6ov
5
/cai Trtcrreucu^ CTT avrw ou
1 Add eV SLKcuoavvy on \6yov
3 Add j/(fyiow. 4 Add 7^).
2 Add
5 Add
been inserted as a correction
than omitted in this passage.
If the words are retained, as in
the Textus Receptus, Tischen-
dorf, and several MSS. and Ver
sions, effn must be supplied with
avvTfXGjv and avvrk^-vdiv.
The passage of Isaiah taken in
the sense in which it was under
stood by the Apostle, may be
paraphrased as follows: Isaiah
lifts up his voice in regard to Is
rael, and says," Though the house
of Israel be as the sand of the sea,
the remnant only shall be saved.
For God is accomplishing and
cutting short his work, for a short
work will God make upon the
earth," or (according to Lach-
mann s reading), " For God will
perform his work, accomplishing
and cutting it short upon the
earth." The application of this
to the present circumstances of
the house of Israel is, that few
out of many Israelites should be
saved, for that God was judging
them as of old he had judged
their fathers. They were living
in the latter days, and the time
was short.
29. In their original connexion
these words have a different bear
ing. The prophet is describing
the desolation of the land in which
all but a few had perished. He is
not speaking of those who are
saved, but of those who are lost.
The succeeding verse is Give
ear now, O ye rulers of Sodom ;
hear the word of the Lord, ye
people of Gomorrah.
30. What then is the conclu
sion ? That the Gentile who
sought not after righteousness,
attained righteousness, but the
righteousness that is of faith.
But Israel, who did seek after it,
attained not to it. What was
the reason of this ? because they
sought it not of faith, but we c
epyw^, under the idea that it might
be gained by works of the law
they stumbled at the rock of of
fence. We are again upon the
track of chap. iii.
31. ro juov diKa.iO(rvvr]G.^ Like
vopog TOV Tcrc.vp.aTOQ rijg ^w>7C} in
ch. viii. Compare also Gal. iii.
21., "If there had been a law
given which could have given life,
verily righteousness should have
VER 2933.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
287
29 ing and cutting it short upon the earth. 1 And as Esaias
said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a
seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto
Gomorrha.
so What shall we say then ? That the Gentiles, which
followed not after righteousness, have attained to righte-
31 ousness, but* the righteousness which is of faith. But
Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness,
32 hath not attained to the law. 2 Wherefore? Because
not* of faith, but as it were of works 3 they stumbled
33 at the* stumblingstone; as it is written, Behold, I lay in
Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and he who 4
believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
1 For he is finishing the work, and cutting it short in righteousness ; because
a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.
2 Add of righteousness. 3 Add of the law. For. 4 Whosoever.
been by the law." The Apostle
means that the Israelites did not
succeed in attaining true right
eousness by the law. This he ex
presses by saying, that Israel,
pursuing after a law as the source
of righteousness, or as belonging
to righteousness, failed in attain
ing to this law. ovKefydatre, arrived
not at ; the sense of anticipation
is lost.
32. eta rl, K. r. X.] In the
words that follow it is most con
venient to take the first clause,
OVK EK TTIOTCWC, with some idea
gathered from what has pre
ceded, " Because they did it, t. e.
pursued the law of righteousness,
and not of faith." The words
we E epytav have probably a
double relation, they form an
antithesis with OVK tic iriareiog, and
are also joined with
The expression
is taken from Isa. viii. 14.
(in the LXX. \idov
The remainder of the passage is
from Isa. xxviii. 16., the words
of which are as follows : i$ov
e yw efji>a.\\(i) etc TO. ScpsXia 2t-
iijv \iQov TroXvTeXrj eV\e/croj ,
yomatov, evrtfiov etc ret
While following the spirit of
this latter passage, the Apostle has
inserted the words \iBov TrpoaKOjj.-
fj,aroc, so as to give a double no
tion of the Rock, which is at once
a stone of stumbling and rock of
offence, and a foundation stone on
which he who rests shall not be
made ashamed. Compare Luke,
xx. 17, 18. for a similar double
meaning : XiOov ov &.mvOKifM-
aav ol olKodopovvrtf, OVTOQ eye-
etc K(f)ci\rjv ywf/ac* Trac o
r eKelvov rov \iQov avv-
288
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. X.
*ASe\<f)oi, r) fjiv evSoKia TTJS e/XTjs Kap8ia<s Kal rj Sevens 1 1Q
irpos TOP 6eov vwep avrvv 2 eis crajTrjpiav. paprvpa) yap 2
avTols on rj\oi> Otov exouo-iJ>, dXX* ov /car iTrlyvww
ayvoovvres yap rrjv rov Oeov SiKaiocrvvrjv, /cat rty liav 3
^roiWcs crr^crat, TT; St/caiocrw^ rou #eou ov/c vvrera-
yrjcrav. re Xos yap Popov xp LcrT S *k SiKauxruvrjv Trai^rt TO 4
1 Add 77.
X. The commencement of this
chapter, as well as of the one
which follows, affords a remark
able instance of a sudden tran
sition of feeling in the mind of
the Apostle. At the end of the
previous chapter, he had passed
out of the sorrowful tone in
which he began, to prove that
very truth over which he sor
rowed the rejection of Israel.
But at this point he drops the
argument, and resumes the strain
which he had laid aside. The
character of the passage may be
illustrated by the parallel passage
in chap. iii. 1 8. There he had
been arguing that the Gentiles
were better than the Jews, or at
least as good ; because they, not
having the law, were a law unto
themselves. Then to correct the
impression that might have arisen
from what he had been saying,
he goes on to point out that the
Jew too had advantages. Now,
a similar contrast is working in
his mind. There was something
that the Jew had, though not the
righteousness of faith. He was
not a sinner of the Gentiles, he
had a zeal for God, he had the
mark of distinction which it has
been said made Jacob to be pre
ferred to Esau ; "he was a reli
gious man." But almost before
the thought of his heart is fully
uttered, the Apostle returns to
TOV lo-pcnjA
his former subject " the right
eousness of faith, Christ the end
of the law to every one that be-
lieveth ; " and gathers fresh proof
from the prophecies that the re
jection of Israel was but accord
ing to the will of God.
1. pip answers to a suppressed
t), which is indicated in v. 3.,
"But they would not ;" or " But
it was not the will of God."
is equivalent to
Comp. etg
ch. i. 5., elg
ver. 4.; also i. 16.
2. rj\ov Seov, zeal for
Compare 2 Cor. xi. 2., r/Xo) yap
v/iae $eov /?^w, and the Apostle s
description of himself in Gal. i.
14., irtpiffaoTtpijjQ ^r)\(t)TrjQ VTrap-
X^. The word zeal is peculiarly
appropriate to the Jewish people,
" all zealots for the law," Acts,
xxi. 20. ; " Ready to endure death
like immortality rather than suf
fer the neglect of the least of
their national customs," Philo,
Leg. ad Caium, 1008. They were
not like the Gentiles indifferent
about religion ; it was not the
power, but rather the truth of the
law that had died away. Many
of them were ready to compass
sea and land to make one prose
lyte. If religion did not include
morality, there would have been
no nation more religious.
ov KCIT tTriyvuffiv, not accord-
VER 14.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
289
10 Brethren, my heart s desire and prayer to God for
2 them l is, that they might be saved. For I bear them
record that they have a zeal of God, but not according
3 to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God s right
eousness, and going about to establish their own right
eousness, are not subject * unto the righteousness of
4 God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness
1 For Israel.
ing to knowledge.^ These words
are not added to extenuate their
fault, as though St. Paul said
" They have a zeal for God, but
know not their Lord s will ; " but
are merely an explanation of how
they could have a zeal for God,
and yet be rejected. In what
follows he explains in what this
ignorance consists.
3. Their ignorance consisted
in not obeying the righteousness
of God, and in setting up their
own righteousness in its place.
Three questions arise on this
verse: (1.) What is meant by
the righteousness of God ? The
righteousness of God plainly
means the righteousness of faith,
the new revelation of which the
Apostle spoke, Rom. i. 17., which
is the power of God unto salva
tion to every one that believeth.
(2.) What is meant by their own
righteousness ? Either the word
tdtoe may simply indicate oppo
sition to 5-fov, " their own " as
opposed to God s ; or it may have
a further meaning of private in
dividual righteousness, consisting
only in a selfish isolated obedience
to the law, not in communion with
God or their fellow-creatures.
But, (3.) what is meant by oi>x
iWeray j)0-a v ? Not something en
tirely different from ayvoovi Ttq
in the first clause ; only as that
expressed their wilful blindness
VOL. II. U
in not recognising the Gospel,
this indicates the effect on their
life and conduct. The expression
is analogous to vTraKoij Trtorewe,
XpiffTOv, aXrjdttac;.
4. re Xoc vo/uou, the end of the
law.~\ Either the aim of the law, or
the termination of the law, or the
fulfilment of the law ; the law
itself meaning either the law of
Moses, or that higher law which
was reflected in it. These diffe
rent senses of the two words
insensibly pass into each other,
and there is nothing unreason
able in supposing that all of them
may have been intended by the
Apostle ; that is to say, that the
expression which he has cm-
plpyed, when analysed, may in
clude these various allusions. It
was Christ to whom the law
pointed, or seemed to point, who
was its fulfilment and also its
destruction. It was of Him
" Moses in the law, and the pro
phets spoke ; " it was He who
was the body of those things of
which the law was the shadow.
It was He who was to " destroy
this temple, and raise up another
temple, not made with hands."
It was He who came to fulfil the
law, in all the senses in which
it could be fulfilled.
It has been said by those who
confine the idea of the word
to the sense of end or ter-
290
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. X.
Ma)V(rfjs y a p ypa(f)ei TT^V OLKaiOcrvvrjv Trjv 5
IK TOV vopov, STL 6 Trot^cras [avra] av6po>TCO<s ^crerai iv
avTy. 1 r) Se IK mcrTeco? Sifcatocrw^ OVTUS Xeyci, Mr) CITTT;? 6
eV r^ /ca/oSia crov Tis d^a^Verai 15 TOI/ ovpavov; TOVT
vptcrro^ KaTayayelv r) Tis Kara^crerai i rr)^ 7
afivo-crov ; TOVT tcrTiv
eV
avayayev.
dXXa rt Xeyec ; Eyyvs crov TO /OTJfta ecrTi^, iv TV VTOpaTi 8
mination, that in the Apostle s
view the law and Christ are
in extreme opposition to each
other. This is true. But it is
not true that this is his only view,
as is shown by such passages as
Romans, iv. 25., Gal. iii. 26., 1
Cor. x. 1., and the context (ver.
6 8.) in this place.
For the meaning of the word
re Xoc, compare Eccles. xii. 13. :
ri\oc, Xoyou TO TTO.V ctK ove; Rom.
vi. 22. : TO fie rt Aoe, w/)v aifaviov ;
1 Tim. i. 5. : T-O e rt Xoe TTJG nap-
oyyeXiac ; and for a similar
ambiguity in its use, 2 Cor. iii.
13. : ov KadafTEp MwvvfJG tTiQei
ETTL TO TTpOffbtTTOV UVTOV
TO prj a.Tf.viaai TOVQ vlovg
<G TO TeXog TOV fcarapyoujue-
rov which may be construed
either to the intent that the
children of Israel should not look
to the reality or fulfilment of
what was being done away (that
is, to the glory behind), or that
they should not look to the pass
ing away or termination of it.
yap.] For this is the righteous
ness of God, Christ the end of
the law ; or, For the true notion of
righteousness is that the law is
done away in Christ, working the
effect of righteousness in every
one that believeth.
5. yap.] " For Moses describes
legal righteousness in one way,
and righteousness by faith in
another."
As in Gal. iii. 10 13., the
Apostle contrasts the nature of
the law and faith, as characterised
in the law itself. The words
which he first quotes (from Lev.
xviii. 5.) imply external acts :
" He who has done the command
ments of the law, shall have life
in the righteousness of the law "
(from the LXX., in which the
word aura refers to the statutes
and judgments that have pre
ceded). Compare 1 Tim. iv. 8. :
"Godliness is profitable unto
all things, having the promise of
the life that now is, and of that
which is to come." ^//ererat, as
elsewhere, used by the Apostle
in a fuller sense than its original
one.
68. The language of Deut.
xxx. 13. (the book of Moses, which
has been regarded almost as an
evangelization of the law, and as
standing in the same relation to
the other books of Moses as the
Gospel of St. John to the three
first Gospels,) is far different.
There our duty to God is not
spoken of, as outward obedience
or laborious service. There the
word is described as " very nigh
to us, even in our mouth and in
our heart." Surely this is the
righteousness that is of faith.
VER. 58.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
291
5 to every one that believeth. For Moses describeth the
righteousness which is of the law, That the man which
6 doeth those things shall live in it L But the righteous
ness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not
in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven ? (that is,
7 to bring Christ down from above :) or, Who shall de
scend into the deep ? (that is, to bring up Christ again
s from the dead). But what saith it ? The word is nigh
1 By them.
The Apostle quotes this pas
sage in a manner which is in
several ways remarkable: (1.)
As there is no word in the pas
sage itself which exactly suits
the meaning which he requires ;
it is the spirit, not the letter,
which he is quoting, as in Rom.
iv. 6. (2.) To each clause he
adds an explanation, " Who shall
ascend up into heaven ? (that
is, to bring down Christ from
above:) or, Who shall descend
into the deep ? (that is, to bring
up Christ from below.)" Comp.
ix. 8. ; Gal. iv. 25. ; 2 Cor. iii.
17. (3.) He has altered the
words, so as to suit them to the ap
plication which he makes of them.
Compare ix. 17.; infra, ver. 11.
Lastly, he puts them into the
mouth of righteousness by faith,
who speaks as a person in the
words of Moses ; cf. ver. 5.
The principal difference be
tween the passage as quoted by
St. Paul, and as it occurs in the
LXX., from which the Hebrew
very slightly varies, is, that in
ver. 7. we have TIQ /cara?7<rrai
elg Trjv avffcrov ; instead of TIQ
cicnrepaffei rj^juv t TO trepnv TVJQ
a\a(Tffr), in the LXX. Much
ingenuity has been expended in re
conciling these variations. Some
have referred the words, etc TO
Trjg SaXaaerrjc, to. a heathen
ish notion of Islands of the Blest,
" beyond the Western wave ; "
while others have supposed that
some copy of the LXX. or some
other version of the Scriptures
may have read tc r)v av<r<ror,
in the meaning of " the sea,"
which has had another sense
put upon it by the Apostle.
It would not be inconsistent
with sound criticism to admit
even very improbable conjectures,
to account for the Apostle s in
accurate quotation, if we found
such quotations occurring in a
single instance only. But as they
occur many times, sound criti
cism and true faith require equally
that we should admit the fact,
and acknowledge that the Apostle
quotes without regard to verbal
exactness, apparently because he
is dwelling rather on the truth
that he is expounding, than on
the words in which it is conveyed,
not verifying references by a
book, but speaking from the ful
ness of the heart.
The truth seems to be that the
parallel required in the words,
" to bring up Christ from the
dead," has led the Apostle to alter
the text in Deuteronomy, so as to
admit of his introducing them.
The general meaning of ver. 6. to
u 2
292
EPISTLE TO THE IIOMANS.
. X.
crov KOL kv rfj /capSta crov. TOVT Zvnv, TO prjpa rrjs
o Kr)pvo-crop,v, on kav o/x-oXoy^crT/s zv rco crrd/xart crov 9
Kvpiov J^crov^, /cat Tno-Ttvcrrjs iv rfj Kapoia crov on 6 Oeos
avrov jjyeipev l/c vtKpwv, craidyjcry /capSta yap TTtcrreverai 10
et9 St/catocrwT^, crrd/xart Se ojnoXoyetrat ets cra)T7jpiai>.
Xeyet yap rj ypa<f>nj ITa? 6 TricrTevaiv ITT avrw ov /carat- 11
ov yap ZCTTLV StacrroX^ lovSatou re /cat 12
that he also descended first into
the lower parts of the earth ? He
that descended is the same also
that ascended;" which is in like
manner based on Psalm Ixviii. 18.:
" Thou hast ascended on high, thou
hast led captivity captive, and re
ceived gifts for men."
9. As in ver. 8. the Apostle
had given an explanation of the
word prjpa, he proceeds to give a
similar explanation of crropart and
Kapc iq. The word pvjpa means
f>rjfj.a rfjc, Triorewc, and the words
oro^ua and /capita refer to the con
fession with the lips of the Lord
Jesus, and the belief with the
heart of his resurrection. Com
pare 1 Peter, i. 24, 25. : ihpAyOq
o ^oproc, Kal TO avdoQ avrov ffcVf-
aev TO e pijjJ.a xvpiov pivei E!Q TOV
aiuiva, TOVTO fie iffTiv prjjjia. TO tvcty-
yeXiardev tig vpdg.
10. The Apostle adds a further
explanatory clause : " For by the
heart we believe, and with the
mouth we confess." Various at
tempts have been made to pre
serve the opposition. (1.) The
words etc %iKo.LO(jvvr}v have been
supposed to refer to justification ;
t\Q ffdJTYipiav, to final salvation.
But it may be answered, that con
fession has no special connexion
with final salvation ; if it had,
the confession of the lips would
be more important than the be
lief of the heart. Or, (2.) The
words SiKaioffvrr) and
8. is as follows : " The right
eousness of faith uses a different
language. It says, Deem it not
impossible ; do not ask the unbe
liever s question : who shall go
up into heaven, by which I mean
to bring down Christ from above ;
or who shall descend into hell,
by which. I mean to bring up
Christ from below ? But what
saith it ? the word is nigh unto
thee, even in thy mouth and in
thy heart. And by the word I
mean, the word of faith which
we preach."
It was doubtless the last verse
which induced the Apostle to
quote the whole passage : " The
word is within thee, ready to come
to thy lips." Here is a description
of faith. To the words which
precede the Apostle has given
a new tone. In the book of
Deuteronomy they mean : " The
commandment which I give you is
not difficult or afar off ; it is not
in the heaven above, nor beyond
the sea." Here they refer, not to
action, but to belief. They might
be paraphrased in the language
of modern times :
" Do not raise sceptical doubts
about Christ having come on
earth, or being risen from the
dead: there is a Christ within
whom you have not far to seek
for."
Compare Eph. iv. 9, 10.: "Now
that he ascended, what is it but
VER. 912.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
293
thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word
9 of faith, which we preach ; that if thou shalt confess with
thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine
heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou
10 shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto
righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made
11 unto salvation. For the scripture saith, Whosoever be-
12 lieveth on him shall not be ashamed. For there is no
difference between the Jew and the Greek : for the same
have been opposed, as inward
justification and outward mem
bership of the Church. " For
by the heart we are justified, and
by the confession of the lips we
are made members of the Church."
This offers a good sense, but the
meaning given to o-wrr/pm is not
justified by such a use of the
word <Two[jivovG 9 as occurs in
Acts, ii. 47.
Instead of adopting explana
tions so forced, it is better to
acknowledge that the antithesis
of $iKcn.offvvr] and cr&Trjpia is one
of style, as at iv. 25., which
need not be insisted upon. The
Apostle means only " that the
heart and lips agree together, in
faith and confession, and their
end righteousness and everlasting
life."
11. The link of connexion is
again a word, iriaTtvuv. The
Apostle had explained a passage
from the Old Testament, 6 9.,
the words of which he had fur
ther drawn out in ver. 10. ; he
adds now a new confirmation. For
the Scripture says : " For every
one that believeth on him shall
not be ashamed." 6 TTIOTVW>
seems to refer to the first of the
preceding clauses ; ol>
6> ]fferai, to the second: "For every
one that believeth on him shall
not be made ashamed in the day
of the Lord."
The citation is slightly altered
from Isa. xxviii. 16. as it stands
in the LXX., o Trioreuwv ov u>)
) where it is remark
able that the word Trdc by which
St. Paul connects this with the
verse following, does not occur.
The addition, however, is not
inconsistent with the general
sense of the original ; the Apostle
has only emphasised the thought
which was already implied with
out it. The alteration was pro
bably suggested by the words
of Joel, which are quoted in v.
13.
12. As the tenth and eleventh
verses, so also the eleventh and
twelfth, hang together by a word.
The Scripture says "every
one," meaning hereby to include
Jew and Greek. For there is
the same Lord, rich in mercy to
all who call upon Him. As at
ch. iii. 29., we have already
passed from the inward truth of
righteousness by faith to the cor
relative which was never wanting
to it in the Apostle s mind,
" admission of the Gentiles."
u 3
294
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[OH. X.
r E\\7)vos 6 yap avros /cvptos Travrvv, TT\OVTO)V eis
TOUS eTri/caXou/xeVous auroV. Has yap 05 az/ eTriKaXeVqTai is
TO ovopa Kvpiov, creamer erat. TTOJS o3*> 7TLKa\ecra)VTai * eis u
ovovK7TLcrTevcrav; Trais SeTTtcrreucroJO-t^ 2 o5 ou/c ^Kovcrcw ;
7ra>5 Se dfcovcrcuo-ii> 2 x^P^ ^pvcrcro^TOS ; TTCOS Se K7)pva)- 15
2 T) a7rocrTaXa>crw> ; Ka0a>s yey/oaTrrat V2s wpcuoi 01
, cutovaovffiv,
6 yap avroQ Kvpio.^\ Whether
by Kvptos is meant God or Christ
is uncertain. Compare Phil. ii.
11.: Trdffa yXwffffa c^OjUoAoy^tnjrcu
on Kvptos Ij<7ouc, where the title
is given to Christ in a similar
connexion; also, Kvptov I^orou^,
in v. 9. It may be God or
Christ, or God in Christ re
conciling the world to himself,
who is in the Apostle s mind.
The application to Christ is sup
ported by the reading xpurrov,
which Lachmann has received
into the text in ver. 17.
13. Again the connecting link
is a word which is taken up by
a quotation from the Old Tes
tament, Joel, ii. 32. (/cat eoreu 6e av
ETUKaXffflJTat TO OVOp.CL KVplOV fftodtj-
ffercu), which, as if well known,
the Apostle does not formally cite
(so ix. 7., and infra, v. 18.). The
same passage is quoted by St.
Peter on the day of Pentecost,
as referring to the times of Christ.
In the place where it originally
occurs, it contains no reference
to the Gentiles.
14 21. The passage which
follows is, in style, one of the
most obscure portions of the
Epistle. The obscurity arises
from the argument being founded
on passages of the Old Testa
ment. The structure becomes dis
jointed and unmanageable from
the number of the quotations.
Some trains of thought are car
ried on too far for the Apostle s
purpose, while others are so
briefly hinted at as to be hardly
intelligible. Yet if, instead of en
tangling ourselves in the meshes
of the successive clauses, we
place ourselves at a distance and
survey the whole at a glance,
there is no difficulty in under
standing the general meaning.
No one can doubt that the Apo
stle intends to say that the pro
phets had already foretold the
rejection of the Jews and the
acceptance of the Gentiles. But
the texts by which he seeks to
prove or to express this, are in
terspersed, partly with difficulties
which he himself felt ; partly,
also, with general statements
about the mode in which the
Gospel was given.
Going off from the word eVt-
KaXovfjLEVovG and iTrtKaXlffrjrai, he
touches first on an objection
which might naturally be urged :
" No one has preached the Gos
pel to them." His mode of rais
ing the objection is such that we
are left in uncertainty whether
this is said by him in the person
of an objector, or in his own
(cf. iii. 18., v. 13, 14., ix. 20,
21.). From one step in the rhe
torical climax he passes on to
another, until the words of the
prophet are brought by associa
tion into his mind. " How beau
tiful are the feet of those who
VER. 1315.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
295
is Lord* is over all, rich unto all that call upon him. For
whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be
H saved. How then are they to call 1 on him in whom they
have not believed? and how are they to 2 believe in him*
whom they have not heard ? and how are they to 2 hear
15 without a preacher ? and how are they to 2 preach, except
they be sent ? as it is written, How beautiful are the
1 Shall they call.
preach good tidings ! " He is
now far away from his original
point. At ver. 16. he returns to
it, and answers the question,
" How are they to call ? " &c., by
saying that there had been a
hearing of the Gospel, but some
had not obeyed what they heard.
This was implied in the words
of the prophet, "who believed
our report ? " the inference from
which is " that faith cometh by
hearing ; " and (we may add)
hearing by the word of God.
After this interpretation the Apo
stle returns to his first thought :
" How shall they believe on
him whom they have not heard ? "
The answer is : "Nay, but they
have heard." All the world has
heard. I repeat the question
that it may be again answered,
" Did not Israel know ? " Moses
and the prophets told them in
the plainest terms that the Is
raelites should be rejected, and
another nation made partakers of
the mercies of God.
Trwe ovv EiriKaXiffuvTcu. ; How
are they to call ?] The conjunc
tive in questions expresses doubt
or deliberation under some pre
vious supposition.
14. It is remarkable that St.
Paul should state the objection
in so animated and forcible a
manner, while the answer given
2 Shall they.
to it is so fragmentary and im
perfect : and also that here, as in
ch. iii., he should interweave his
own thoughts with the objection.
The whole of the passage is an
amplification of the thought
" How can they call upon God,
except they be taught ? " But
in the words tav pj aTrooraXwo-ty,
and in the quotation which fol
lows, the Apostle is thinking of
himself and the other ministers
of the Gospel as appointed by
God "Apostles of the Churches."
ov OVK ijKovffay ;] " whom they
have not heard ? " as in Eph. iv.
21., it is said el CLVTOV ijKovffare,
as in Acts, iii. 22., avrov O.KOV-
fftade ; not " about whom they
have not heard," which, though
supported by Iliad, 1. 490., aidev
Z&ovrog UKOVWV, is only a poetical
construction of the Genitive.
15. The passage in Isaiah (Iii.
7.) is suggested by the thought
of the preachers going forth,
and the Apostle is led to quote
it from association. It has, how
ever, a bearing on his argument,
as it implies that there must be
those who are to preach the Gos
pel. In this passage the LXX.
has we wpa 7n rwv opiw, we iro$eg
evayyeXi^ojjievov aKorjv eipyvrig, we
vayye\io^i>oe aya0a. The He
brew, according to Ewald, is as
follows : " How lovely upon
u 4
296
EPISTLE TO THE ROMAKS,
. X.
TrdSeg TWV ei5ayyeXto/xeV<yz> l ay add. d\\ ov Trai Tes vrrrj- 15
Kovcrav ra> evayyeXtw. Hcratas yap Xeyet Kvpie, rt s CTU-
<TTev<Tej> TT? aKOTj T^/XWZ ; dpa rj TT terns e d/coTJs, 17 oe CXKOT) 17
Sta /3T7/xarog ^tcrrou. 2 clXXa Xeyw, /XT) OVK T7/covcrcu> ; pevovv is
ye Ets Tracrcw TT)Z^ y^ z^rfkBtv 6 (j)66yyo<$ avrwv, /cat ets ra
Trepara TTJS ot/cov/xeVTis ra pij^ara avrav. dXXa Xeya>, 19
/XT) Io-par)\ OVK tyvco 3 ; TT/OOJTO? MwvcrTjs Xeyet Eya> Trapa-
j u/xa? CTT ov/c etfvei, CTTI e^rei dcrv^erw irapopyi^
. Hcraca? 8e cxTroroX/xa /cat Xeyet EvpeOrjv [et ] 4 rots 20
e/xe /XT) Drover tz/, e /x^a^? lyevo^v [tv~\ rots ejae /XT) eTre-
pa)Ta)crLV. TT^OS Se To^ lcrpar)\ Xeyet c O\r)v rrjv f)p,epav 21
1 Add elp-fivrjv rcav
3 -
y TO.
2 SeoG.
4 Om. eV.
the mountains are the feet of
him that proclaimeth joy ! "
The citation in the New Tes
tament is rather nearer to ;the
Hebrew than to theLXX., which,
however, as the Apostle has
changed the number and omitted
the beautiful figure eVt r&v opeW,
it is not certain that he is quoting.
See Essay on Quotations, vol. i.
16. But here is an explanation
of our difficulty. It was not that
they were without the glad tidings
of the Gospel, but that they re
fused to listen to them. (Comp.
ch. iii. 3. : "For what if some
did not believe ?") This, too, was
shadowed forth in the words of
prophecy. When the prophet
says, " Who hath believed our
report?" he clearly implies that
some did not believe. There the
link was wanting, not in the
preaching of the Gospel (comp.
tV/errfvo-ev), but in the belief of
the hearer.
17. The words of Isaiah are
made the ground of a further in
ference, which is also the answer
to the question which was started
in ver. 14. : "How are they to
believe him whom they have not
heard ? " So far, at any rate, we
may conclude that "Faith cometh
by hearing," to which the Apostle
adds, as if led on by verbal asso
ciation, and "hearing comes by
words, the word of Christ."
18. Again the Apostle pursues
the word a/co// in a different di
rection. How faith comes in
general we know ; but did it
come to them ? To which the
Apostle replies, by an abrupt ex
clamation " But I say, have
they not heard ?" a\Xa is a pas
sionate adversative. He had been
previously speaking of Jews ;
here he includes Jews and Gen
tiles. We may answer, he says,
in the words of the Psalmist,
" Their sound is gone out into all
lands, and their voice unto the
ends of the earth." Ps. xix.
from the LXX.
19. But I say (to put the
case more precisely), Did not
Israel know ? Did not know,
what ? the Gospel, or the word
of God in general, or the rejection
VER. 1621.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
2 ( J7
feet of them l that bring glad tidings of good things !
16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias
17 saith, Lord, who hath believed our report ? So then
faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of
18 Christ. 2 But I say, Have they not heard? Nay rather*,
their sound went into all the earth, and their words
19 unto the ends of the world. But I say, Did not Israel
know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy
by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I
20 will anger you. But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I
was found in 3 them that sought me not ; I was made
21 manifest in 3 them that asked not after me. But to
1 Add That preach the gospel of peace and.
2 God.
Unto.
of the Jews in particular ? The
latter agrees best with the words
which follow: "First, Moses
prophesies of the Jews being pro
voked to anger by the Gentiles."
But, on the other hand, what the
previous context requires is, not
the rejection of the Jews, but the
Gospel or the Word of God in
general ; nor would the laws of
language allow us to anticipate
what follows as the subject of
tyvo). "But I say, did not Israel
know of the rejection of the
Jews, of which I am about to
speak ? " The truth seems to be,
that what was to be supplied after
y>/w, was not precisely in the
Apostle s mind. He was think
ing of the Gospel ; but with the
Gospel the rejection of the Jews
was so closely connected, that he
easily makes the transition from
one to the other.
TTjOtDroe Mwvtrj/e.] First, that is,
before all others, Moses, as after
him the prophets. The words
which follow, are quoted from
the LXX. (Deut. xxxii. 21.),
which differs in reading avroi>^
for vpdg.
Trapa^TjXoxrw.] Comp. xi. 13.
20. Hffa iag c)e.] Moses speaks
first obscurely ; but afterwards
Esaias freely and boldly, and, as
it were, without fear of the Jews,
says, " I was found of them that
sought me not."
evpedrjv.^ What is already
past, in the language of the pro
phet, is made present in the
application by the Apostle.
21. Bat to the Jews far diffe
rent is his language. In address
ing them he says: "All day
long I stretched forth my hands
to a disobedient and gainsaying
people." Both passages are taken
from Isa. Ixv. 1, 2., with slight
variations from the version of
the LXX., which is as follows :
v TOLQ E/J.E prj
etTTft, ifiov elp.1 TW tdi ei) ot oJ*c exa-
\taciv JJLOV TO ovofjia.
rag ^elpac; yuou 6 Xr/r
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
TO,? X^pfa f JLOV npbs \abv a
298
efeTT
Xeyovra.
Xao>> a7rio>j>ra Kct
Here it is obvious that
the nation referred to is in both
verses the same, viz. the Jews.
The Apostle was perhaps led by
the sound of the word tQvog to
apply the first verse to the Gen
tiles.
Such is the mode in which the
Apostle clothes his thoughts.
. X.
/cat
The language of the Old Testa
ment is not the proof of the
doctrine which he is teaching,
but the expression of it. He
sees the great fact before him
of the acceptance of the Gentiles
and the rejection of the Jews,
and reads the prophecies by the
light of that fact. The page of
the Old Testament sparkles be
fore his eyes with intimations of
VER. 21.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
299
Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my
hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.
the purposes of God. There is
an analogy between the circum
stances of Israel, now and for
merly, dimly visible. To the
mind of the Apostle this analogy
does not present itself as to the
mind of the author of the He
brews, as embodied in the whole
constitution and history of the
Jewish people, but in particular
events or separate expressions.
Hence, when passing from the
law to the Gospel, he is like one
declaring dark sayings of old.
And his language appears to us
fragmentary and unconnected,
because he takes his citations in
unusual senses, and places them
in a new connexion.
300
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS,
[OH. XI.
Adyoj ovv, fJLrj aTraxraTO 6 #eos rov Xabv avrov, [/ ov irpoe- 11
yva) ;] jjirj yevoiro KOL yap lya) ^Icrpa^Xurrj^ et/xi, e/c cnrep-
^aaros A/BpadfJi, <[>vXrjs Beviapdv. OVK anaKraro 6 0os 2
rov Xabv avrov, ov irpotyva). rj OVK oloare Iv HXia ri Xeyet
7] ypacfryj ; a)? ivrvyyavei ro> dew Kara rov icrpayX 2 , Kvpie, 3
TrpotpTjras crov aireKTeLvav 3 , ra Ov&iaorrripia, crov Ka-
1 Om. ov Trpotyvov.
XL The whole of the three
chapters viii., ix., x. may be re
garded as the passionate struggle
of conflicting emotions in the
Apostle s mind, Trove JJLEV vvvi ct
of his present and former self.
Are Israel saved, or not ? They
must be, for I also am one of
them. At last, the purpose of
God respecting them clears be
fore his eyes. That they are
rejected is a fact ; but it is only
for a time, that the Gentiles may
be received. Hitherto he has
been occupied with laying the
broad foundation of a universal
Gospel. Is he the God of the
Jews only ? is he not also of the
Gentiles ? Yes ; of the Gentiles
also ; and of the Gentiles ex
clusively it seemed, but for the
remnant who are saved. Such
was the impression to which his
own reception would naturally
have led the Apostle, as he went
from city to city, finding no
hearers of the word, but Gentiles
only. Of the two divisions of
mankind, he seemed to lose one,
and gain the other. The medita
tion of this fact had revealed to
him a new page in God s dealings
with mankind. But now a fur
ther insight into the purposes of
God breaks upon him. In the
order of Providence came the
Jew first, and afterwards the
Gentile ; and the Jew last re-
Add Xt-ywv.
Add KO.I.
turning to the inheritance of his
fathers. The erring branch that
has twined with the briars cf the
wilderness, is brought back to
its own olive, and the tree covers
the whole earth.
1. The prophets spoke in pa
rables of the acceptance of the
Gentiles, and of the rejection of
the Jews. What is the inference
that we are to draw from this ?
That God has cast off his peo
ple ? The Apostle starts back
from the conclusion which, up to
this point, he has been seeking to
illustrate and enforce : " I say,
God forbid ! for I also am one
of them."
otTrwo-ttro contains an allusion
to the ninety-fourth Psalm, from
which the Apostle has borrowed
the expression, on OVK cnrwae-at
Ki/pioe TOV \aov avTOVj ver. 14.
ov irpoiyvu, A.A.f., om. B. C. G.
g. v. It has probably been in
serted from v. 2. Compare viii.
1. for an instance of a similar
insertion.
Kal yap iyw, For I also.~\ The
Apostle feels that the future of
his countrymen is bound up with
his own ; as if he said, " They
cannot be cast off, for then I
should be rejected ; and they
will be accepted, because I am
accepted." He recoils from the
one consequence, and is assured
of the other. He whom God
11
1 3.J
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
301
I say then, Hath God cast away his people [* which he
2 foreordained*] ? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite,
of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God
hath not cast away his people which he foreordained.*
3 Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias ? how he
maketh intercession to God against Israel 2 , Lord, they
have killed thy prophets 3 , digged down thine altars ;
1 Omit which he foreknew.
chose to be the Apostle to the
Gentiles could not be a cast
away. This is one way of draw
ing out his thought. More simply,
and perhaps truly, it may be
said, that he is expressing the
feeling as of a parent over a
prodigal son, that "he cannot be
lost," the true ground of which
is the affection which will not
bear to be separated from him.
For a similar particularity of
statement respecting his own
claim as an Israelite, compare
Phil. iii. 5.
2. God has not cast off his
people ; but, as heretofore, has
fulfilled his purpose towards a
remnant. The words \aov ov
Trpolyru have been translated
" which he foreknew," in the
English Version, in accordance
with the signification of the word
TTpoyivojaKsiv in some other pas
sages (Acts, xxvi. 5., 2 Pet. iii.
17.). This, however, affords no
good opposition to UTTUMTCITO, if it
can be said to have any meaning
at all. The clause is better ex
plained "which he foreordained,"
or "respecting which he had a
purpose." So in 1 Pet. i. 20., our
Saviour is called " a Lamb fore
ordained before the foundation of
the world." The Apostle means to
intimate that all which related to
Israel was predetermined. It is
a reason for believing that they
8 Add saying.
3 And.
are not rejected, that no thing hap
pens to them which is not wpi-
fffiirri fiuvXrJKaiirpoyi UHrei rov $co&.
The consolation is of the same
kind as is implied in the words
of the heathen poet : "Non hrec
sine numine divum eveniunt."
iv f H\i 0,] in the place about
Elias (1 Kings, xix. 10.). This
is an instance of a common cus
tom among the Jews of using
proper names as landmarks for
passages of Scripture ; so, in Ga-
briele, Dan. ix. 21., that is, in
the passage about Gabriel. The
quotation which follows is a-
bridged from the LXX.
irrvyxavct,] "goes to God"
against Israel; tvruyxcb w, accord
ing to the analogy of a^ro/zat, and
other Greek words, from the sense
of " meeting with," " going to,"
acquires in the later and ecclesi
astical Greek a secondary notion
of " prayer, supplication to."
3, 4. Is it only I that say this ?
Does not the Scripture say so
too ? Elias comes to God as a
man might do now, and complains
that all Israel are rejected, and
that there is but one godly man
left. And the answer of God
gives him the same consolation
that we now have : " Yet have
I left to myself seven thousand
men that have not bowed the
knee to Baal."
It is doubtful with what de-
302
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. XL
wos, KOLL ^rovcriv rfJ
/xov. aXXa TL Xeyei avrw 6 xp^arioTxos ; Kareknrov 4
yovv
Bda\.
/car 5
riv X<*/HTOS yeyovev et Se ^apiTi, OVKCTL i epyw, 6
eVei 17 X ^ 019 ov Ken, yiverai x**/ 019 - 1 ^ ; emt^ret 7
Io~pairj\ f rovro 2 ov/c eTrerv^ev ; r) Se tK\oyr} iTreTv^ev ol
1 Add et Se e| epywv, OVK
gree of precision the Apostle
would have applied the details of
the prophecy to the Jews of his
own day. He may, perhaps, be
thinking of himself as answering
to the person of Elias in the
words " I only am left alone ; " he
may possibly intend an allusion
to "those who killed the Lord
Jesus," in the words " Lord they
have slain thy prophets ; " whether
such analogies were present to
his mind or not, his main pur
pose is clear, that purpose being
to inculcate the general lesson
that, when once before Israel had
been rejected, the oracle of God
said that a remnant should be
saved.
4. 6 xprjpaTirriJiOQ.^ The oracu-
lar response in the passage of 1
Kings, xix. 12. the "still small
voice." The quotation which
follows is designedly altered, to
give point to the Apostle s words.
In the original it does not come
immediately after the complaint
of the prophet, but is introduced
in connexion with the cruelties
of Jehu and Hazael, 1 Kings,
xix. :
Ver. 17. "And it shall be, that
him that is saved from the sword
of Hazael Jehu shall slay : and
him that is saved from the sword
of Jehu shall Elisha slay."
Ver. 18. " And thou shalt leave
t^ epyov.
in Israel 7000 men, all the knees
which have not bowed the knee
to Baal, and every mouth which
hath not kissed him."
It is remarkable that the
number 7000 occurs in the next
chapter as the number of the
valiant men of Israel. The Apo
stle is citing from memory; he is
not likely to have turned to the
original passage to select what
would suit his purpose.
ri/BaaA.] (1.) Older interpret
ers explain the feminine article
before BaaX, by supposing the
word eiKon to be understood, but
no other example is adduced of
such an omission. (2.) It has
been thought by Gesenius that the
feminine is here used as a mode
of contempt, as in some other
instances in Hebrew. It is doubt
ful, however, how far such an
idiom, if it exist in any precisely
parallel case in Hebrew, would
be transferred to the Hellenistic
Greek. Would a Jew have said
fl ZEVQ by way of contempt ? (3.)
A more probable supposition is,
that there was a goddess, as well
as a god Baal ; like Lunus and
Luna, in Latin. This feminine
occurs in several passages of the
LXX.:
Judges, ii. 13. IXaTpevffav TTJ
BaaX Kol ra?e Aorapraie.
Judges, X. 6. eXaTpevffav rale
VER. 48.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
303
4 and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what
saith the answer of God unto him ? I have reserved to
myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the
5 knee to Baal. Even so then at this present time also
there is a remnant according to the election of grace
6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works : otherwise
7 grace is no more grace. 1 What then ? hath not Israel 2
obtained that which he seeketh for? But the elec-
s tion hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded (accord-
1 Add But if it be of works, then it is no more grace : otherwise work is
no more work. Israel hath not.
very inferior though ancient MS.
authority, and even thus requir
ing help from emendation,
ti e EL, fpywv, OVK en ecrrl ^aptc t
7Tt ro epyov ou/cert earlv tpyov.
It is not necessary to argue
whether or not this clause is
in character with the style of
St. Paul, on which ground pro
bably no fair objection could be
raised to it, when the want of
external evidence sufficiently
condemns it.
7. TI olv ;] What is the conclu
sion then? The Apostle checks the
digression which was once more
carrying him away. Is Israel
saved? Is Israel lost? Neither,
exactly. It has not attained what
it is seeking for, but a portion of
Israel has attained it.
Such is the way of taking the
passage according to the Textus
Receptus and the English version,
against which, as the question
is only one of a stop, manu
script authority cannot be set in
the scale.
The connexion will have
to be drawn out somewhat
differently if, with Lachmann,
we place a note of interrogation
after lirervxev. " What is the
BaaXetfj. KCU TCUQ
So Hosea, ii. 10. ; Jer. xi. 13. ;
Tob. i. 5.
5. So now, at the present time,
God has chosen a remnant. In
the days of Elias there were more
worshippers of the true God than
any one could have imagined, in
Israel. Even so now, from the
Jews themselves, there are a great
company of believers.
fear eK\oyi]v ^apiroe,] according
to the election which grace
makes; gen. of the subject.
6. As in many other passages,
the Apostle is led back by the
association of words to the great
antithesis. Compare chap, iv 4.,
ry Se epya^opeva) 6 fj,iffdoQ ov \o-
yi crcu Kara, ^apiv, K. T. A.j Eph.
ii. 9., OVK: e tjoywy iVa pr] rig Kav-
X*/<Trjrai. " But if of grace, not
as the Jews suppose by obedi
ence to the law ; for grace ceases
to be grace, when we bring in
works." In these words the
Apostle is already taking up the
other side of the argument, that
is, he is showing why Israel was
rejected, not why a remnant was
spared.
In the Textus Receptus is added
the parallel clause, resting on
304
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS,
[Cii. XL
Se \OiTTol 7ra)pa>0r)crav, Kaa)S yeyp&TTTai oj/cet auroi?
#eos irvevfjia /caraWfea)?, ofidaXfJiovs rov /AT) jSktirtiv KOL
a)ra rov /AT) aKoveiv, ea>s TT?? cr^/xepo^ T^/xepas. /cat JauelS
Xeyet, TevYjOrjTO) r) TpdVea avr&v ei? Trayi Sa KCU et? Qrjpav
Kal eis <TKdv?>a\ov KOI ei? cb TctTroSctyta OLVTOLS,
Tcocrav ol d</>#aX/AOi avrow rov /AT) /SXeVew, /cal roz^
avrwv Sta TTCWTOS
words are used in a metaphorical
sense, the substantive meaning
" sadness," the verb " to arouse sad
ness." They acquire in the LXX.
a further sense of "torpor," "to
cause torpor," as in Ps. Ix. 5., Is.
xxix. 10., analogous to the tran
sition of ideas in the words smit
ten or stricken in English ; " tor
por" is the meaning of ^ara.w^iQ
in this passage.
9, 10. And David (in Ps. Ixix.
23.) uses the same language:
" Let their table be made a snare
unto them, and a gin and an
offence and a retribution. Let
them have the evils of old age,
blindness and bent limbs."
St. Paul quotes this passage,
not in its original sense of a
malediction against the enemies
of God, but as a proof of the re
jection of the Jews. The original
passage is one of those which in
all ages have been a stumbling-
block to the readers of Scripture,
in which the spirit of the Old
Testament appears most unlike
the spirit of the New. With the
view of escaping from what is
revolting to Christian feelings, it
has not been uncommon to con
strue the imperative moods as
future tenses. The Psalmist or
prophet is supposed to be predict
ing, not imprecating, the destruc
tion of his enemies. But the
spirit of these passages cannot
be altered by a change of tense
conclusion then ? Has not Israel
obtained what it seeks for ? It
may be, not. This makes no dif
ference; the election has obtained
it, and the hardness of heart of
the rest only fulfilled the pre
dictions of prophecy." Accord
ing to this way of punctuating
the passage, the question is tenta
tive, as in Rom. iii. 3.
eVtforet,] which has far greater
MS. authority in its favour than
the imperfect gTTf^ref, Gr.f. g. v.,
may be explained by supposing
a reference to the expectation of
the Messiah among the Jews in
the days of the Apostle.
8. As in chap, iv., Moses and
the Psalmist are quoted in suc
cession, to illustrate the Apostle s
statement. This was only what
Moses said "God gave them the
spirit of torpor, eyes that they
should not see, and ears that they
should not hear unto this day *
(as was then said, and we still
repeat).
The quotation is taken, though
not precisely as it stands, from
Deut. xxix. 4., where the last
words occur with a slight change;
probably there is also a recol
lection of the passage so often
quoted in the Gospels and Acts,
Isaiah, vi. 10. The expression
TTvevpa KararvEewg is introduced
from Isaiah, xxix. 10.
is derived from /,-ara-
), to pierce, wound. Both
VER. 810.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
305
8 ing as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of
torpor*, eyes that they should not see, and ears that
9 they should not hear ;) unto this day. And David saith,
Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a
10 stumblingblock, and a recompense unto them : let their
eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down
their back alway.
or mood ; neither is it consistent,
in such a psalm, for example, as
the Ixviii., to read the first por
tion of the psalm as a prayer or
wish, and refuse to consider the
remainder as an imprecation. It
is better to admit. Avhat the words
of the passage will not allow us
to deny, that the Psalmist is im
precating God s wrath against
his own enemies. But first his
enemies are God s enemies, so
that his bitter words against them
lose the character of merely pri
vate enmity. Secondly, the. state
of life in which such a prayer
could be uttered by a " man after
God s own heart," is altogether
different from our own. It was
a state in which good and evil
worked with greater power in
the same individual, and in which
a greater mixture of good and
evil, of gentleness and fierceness,
existed together than we can
easily imagine. The Spirit of
God was working " in the un
tamed chaos of the affections,"
but also leaving them often in
their original strength and law
lessness. David curses his ene
mies, believing them to be the
enemies of God. The Christian
cannot curse even the enemies of
God, still less his own. This
contrast we need not hesitate to
admit ; if the writers of the Old
Testament did not scruple to dis-
VOL. II.
own " the visitation of the sins of
the fathers upon the children ; "
neither need we refuse to say with
Grotius, " Eis ex spiritu legis
optat Davides paria."
9. r) rpaTTf^a.] Let their table >
spread with the banquet, be a
snare to them. We need not
think, with some commentators,
of the table of the Lord, which
is a snare to the unworthy par
takers of it, or of the Paschal
Lamb, which may be said, in a
certain sense, to have ensnared
the Jews at the destruction of
Jerusalem ; still less of the tables
of the money-changers, and least
of all of the Temple, which is re
garded as synonymous with the
altar of the Temple, and this with
the table here spoken of. The
meaning is better illustrated by
the words of Shakespeare :
" Poison be their drink. Gall,
worse than gall, the daintiest that
they taste."
Comp. the preceding verse of
the psalm : " They gave me gall
for my meat, and in my thirst
they gave me vinegar to drink."
elg S//pav,] either " for a cause
of their becoming a prey," or pro
bably, in Alexandrian Greek, "for
a trap or gin." Such appears to
be the meaning of the word in
Ps. xxxiv. 8., ?/ Sjjpa r/j/ tKpv^e,
where as here Trayig has preceded.
10. TOV V&TOV UVTUIV. ] BOW
306
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cu. XL
Atyco ovv, /xr} errTcucraz Iva Trecrtocriv ; prj yevoiro dXXa n
TO* avTwv TTapaTTT^jJiaTL TI cr^rrjpia rois Wvtviv ets TO
o-ai OLVTOVS. d Se TO TrapaTTTOJ^a avruv TrXouTOS 12
/cat TO yJTTrjfJia avrvv TrXouTOS iOvwv, TTOCTCO p,a\\ov
TO Trroaia avTwv. vp.lv Se 1 Xeyw Tots edve<Tiv. e< oVo^ 13
ou^ 2 eiftl eyw e#^(z/ aTrocnroXo?, Trp SiaKOvtav JJLOV
; et TTOJS Trapa^rjXaxra) [JLOV TT)^ crap/ca Aca craxra) u
as ef avT&v. el yap 17 0,770)80X7) avT&v Kara\\ayr) /cdcr- !5
down their neck, either with old
age or slavery.
11. Language like this would
seem to imply that Israel has
fallen. The cup of God s wrath
must be full against those of
whom such things are said. But
the Apostle has not forgotten the
other side of his argument, from
which he digressed for a mo
ment. Is their stumble a fall 1
he asks (the very word tirraiaav
prepares the way for the con
clusion at which he is aiming) ;
or (if we take the words eWcac-ar
and Triadxjiv in a metaphorical
sense), have they erred so as
utterly to fall away from grace ?
The Apostle, with the words of
Moses, which he had quoted in
the previous chapter, still in his
mind, replies : " Not so ; " their
fall was but a Divine economy,
in which the Gentiles alternated
with the Jews. The temporary
precedence of the Gentiles wa^
intended to have, and may have,
the effect of arousing them to
jealousy. As in other passages,
the Apostle recovers the lost
theme by repeating the same
formula with which he com
menced At yw ovv.
r/ <rwr?7jO/a,] the salvation which
answers to this fall or which is
given to the Gentiles ; ro7e tQ
2 Om. ovv.
a possessive dative after // <rwrr?p/a,
or more probably after a verb un
derstood. The word Trapct^Awo-w
alludes to the passage from Deut.
(xxxii. 21.), which has been al
ready referred to (x. 19.).
12. irXovTOQ KO<T;UOV,] the en
richment of the world. The word
Koajjioe is general, though here
the connexion shows the Gentiles
to be chiefly in the Apostle s mind.
teal TO ijrrrffjia avrwy.] Their
inferiority, being ^Vro^ec, //rrw-
yLtevoi, is opposed to TT\OVTOQ eOvwi ,
and also TO TrX/ypwjua, their ful
ness. In the latter word is in
cluded the fulfilment of God s
purposes (a secondary thought,
which enters also into the mean
ing of TrX^jOw^ua TOV ^porov, Tatv
fccupa)* ), as well as the filling up
of the numbers of the elect.
Israel may be said to be filled up
when all Israelites are included
and there is no more room left in
the measures of Providence.
13. vfjuv fie Xeyw TO"IQ edveffiv.^
But in saying this, I am as one
addressing those who are without.
I speak not to the Jews them
selves, but to you Gentiles. As
though he said, " Judge ye what
I say, who are spectators of this
work of God, and know what
blessings you have received by
the partial rejection of the Jews."
VER. 1115.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
307
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall ?
God forbid : but rather through their fall is salvation
unto the Gentiles come, for to provoke them to jealousy.
12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and
the diniinishing of them the riches of the Gentiles ; how
is much more their fulness ? But * to you Gentiles I speak,
nay rather 2 *, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gen-
H tiles, I magnify mine office : if by any means I may
provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and
15 may* save some of them. For if the casting away of
them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the re-
1 For.
offov pet ouv elfju eyw.] It is
better, with Lachmann,to separate
these words by a full stop from
the preceding. The Apostle is
beginning a new thought, in which
he applies the argument which
has been just used, to his own
position as Apostle of the Gen
tiles. He " goes off " upon the
word Gentiles. "Nay, I do not
hide but rather magnify mine
office of Apostle of the Gentiles,
in the hope that I may rouse my
kinsmen to jealousy, and save, I
will not venture to say all, but a
few of them." The name of apo-
stleship of the Gentiles was odious
to the Jews. The Apostle does
seek to mitigate this hatred or
put away the odious name. His
hope mounts higher that a whole
some shame at the conversion of
the heathen may bring back his
countrymen to the truth. Com
pare Trapar)\u>(Tai in ver. 11.
According to another way of
taking the passage, the Apostle is
supposed to say " As the Apostle
of the Gentiles, I magnify mine
office to include the Jews ; the
term ZQw] is ambiguous and com-
2 Om. nay rather.
prehends both." This is more
than is contained in the text, and
destroys the point of the words,
oaov H.EV ovv elfj.1 f yw
According to a third view the
Apostle is excusing himself to
the Gentiles for the honour he
may be supposed to have done to
the Jews in the preceding words,
in extenuation of which he pleads
that it is the glory of his office as
Apostle of Gentiles to rouse the
Jews to jealousy as this would be
the enrichment of the Gentiles,
and of all mankind. Too much
has here also to be supplied ; and
the connexion, though more con
tinuous, is obscure and laboured.
15. Neither is it a merely vi
sionary hope that some of them
shall be saved. " For as I said
above, so say I now again ; if the
casting away of them be the re
concilement of the world, what
shall the receiving of them be but
life from the dead." In more
senses than one, it might be said,
that the casting away of the Jews
was the reconciliation of the world,
(1.) as they were simultaneous;
x 2
308
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. XI.
, rts TI 77pdo-X?7jU,i//{,s el JUT) far] IK veKpwv; el Se TI anap^y 16
dyioi, Kal TO (frvpajjia Kal elrj pi>a dyia, Kal ol /cXaSoi. el 17
Se rwes TUTS /cXaSo>i> eeK\d<T0r)crav, crv Se a/ypteXaios &v
eveKevTpio-OvjS eV avrols Kal <rvyKOLVtovo<$ rrjs /oi&ys Kal TT}S
7710x77709 XT?? eXcuas eyevov, fJirj KaraKav^o) TOIV /cXaSaj^* is
et Se KaraKavyacrai, ou crv TT)^ /iaz/ /3acrraei9, dXX 17
(2.) as without the doing away
of the law of Moses, the Gentiles
could not have been admitted.
The words <i>]7 CK VEK^MV have
had more than one meaning as
signed to them : (1.) Life out of
death ; the house of Israel who
are dead, shall be alive again.
Compare chap. iv. 17 20. But
the connexion requires that the
benefit should be one in which
Gentiles as well as Jews are par
takers. There would be a
want of point in saying, " If
their casting away be reconcile
ment to the world, what shall
their acceptance be, but the
quickening of the Jews into life ? "
(2.) It is better, therefore, to take
w/} EK veKptiv of some undefined
spiritual good, of which Gentile
and Jew alike have a share, and
which, in comparison of their
former state may be regarded as
resurrection ; the thought, how
ever, of their prior state, is sub
ordinate. Least of all in a cli
max, should the meaning of each
word which the Apostle uses be
exactly analysed. Words fail
him, and he employs the strongest
that he can find, thinking rather
of their general force than of
their precise meaning.
16. The last argument might
be described in modern language
as an argument from analogy ;
this which follows, as an argu
ment from tendencies. As the
beginning is, so shall the comple
tion be ; as the cause is, so shall
the effect be ; as the part, so the
whole. In a similar way the
Apostle argues in the 1 Cor. vii.
14., that "the unbelieving hus
band is sanctified in the wife,"
that children are holy if their
parents are so; that " if while we
were yet sinners Christ died for
us, much more being justified we
shall be saved " (Rom. v. 9.) ;
that " he which hath begun a good
work will perform it until the
day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. i. 6.).
The figures aTrap^f] and pia seem
intended to express two different
phases of the Apostle s argument.
ATrapx/; = the firstfruits of the
Gospel ; tyvpapa, the mass from
which the firstfruits are taken,
and which is consecrated by their
oblation (Num. xv. 21.). The
image is a favourite one with St.
Paul, occurring in 1 Cor. v. 6,
Gal. v. 9., as well as here.
Stripped of its figure, the mean
ing of the clause will be : As
some Jews are believers, all Jews
shall one day become so ; the
" firstfruits " of the Gospel con
secrate the nation to God. The
word pia, on the other hand, may
have several associations. It may
either mean the patriarchs (cf.
below, verse 28., "beloved for
the fathers sakes "); or the Jew
ish dispensation generally ; or the
Christian Church, which was the
stock, new yet old, from which
the branches were broken off.
VER. 1618.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
309
is ceiving of them be, but life from the dead ? And* if the
firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root
17 be holy, so are the branches. But* if some of the
branches be broken off, andthou, being a wild olive tree,
wert graffed in among them, and with them becamest *
is partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree ; boast
not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest
This last interpretation best pre
serves the parallelism of the
clauses, and is most in keeping
with ver. 18. For the use of the
word ay/a, comp. ch. vii. 12. :
" So then the law is holy, and
the commandment holy, and just,
and good."
17. ei Se rives. ] The Apostle
anticipates an objection, " that
some of the branches were broken
off." ]t is the ever recurring ri
yap el ijTricrrrjffav ru te (iii. 3.)
in a new form. In the words
aypitAaiog and ffvyKou wvoQ rijg
pifyg the Apostle is preparing
his answer.
The paronomasia in /cXadoi and
e^K\acrOr)<Tai i which is repeated
in v. 19., is hardly translatable
in English : " If some of the
branches ceased to be branches,"
&c.;comp. ii. 1., xii. 3., 1 Cor. xi.
31, 32., and many other passages
for similar plays of words, in
which the Apostle is said to have
a peculiar delight, or rather
which he often seems to employ
from a defect of expression.
The olive tree, like the vine, is
used in the Old Testament (Jer.
xi. 16.) as a figure of the house of
Israel. No image could be more
natural to an inhabitant of Pales
tine. The relative dignity rather
than the fruitfulness of the cul
tivated and wild olive is here the
point of similarity. Those who
are acquainted with the subject
of grafting trees, observe that
the comparison fails, because it is
not the new which derives strength
from the old, but the old from the
new. Such an observation may
be placed on a level with the re
mark which is sometimes thought
to reflect light on the meaning of
the parable of the wheat and
tares, " that wheat is only another
kind of tares." Our Lord and
St. Paul speak not as botanists
or men of science, but in the
familiar language of ordinary
life.
18. el Be Karat. . . . pia (re.^ But
if you do boast, remember this: it
is you who are dependent on the
root, not the root on you. The
Apostle is not speaking of the
Old Testament as the root of the
New, but of the Christian Church,
the spiritual Israel, which is old
and new at once, the root on
which the Gentiles are ingrafted
branches, and from which the
Jews are broken off.
19. The thought already latent
in ver. 17. is distinctly brought
out ; "therefore you will say :
I was put in their place." They
were broken off that I might be
grafted in.
20. I grant it. [St. Paul has
already said the same in other
words at ver. 11.] But it is
another and a more practical les
son I would have you learn from
the same fact. They were broken
x 3
310
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
[Cn. XL
Kal
pitfL ere. Ipels ovv \Efe/cXacr#7?craz 1 /cXaSot, IVa ey a) lyKtv- 19
rpicrOa). /caXa>9. TT? cwri-OTia eK\do-0r)crav, cru Se TT; Trtcrret 20
ecrr?) KOLS. JUT) vifjrjXfxfipovei, dXXa <j)o/3ov. el yap 6 #eos rwz/ 21
/cara <>V<JLV /cXaSa)^ OVAC e^eccraro, ouSe crou </>eicrerai,. 2 iSe 22
Oeov. eVi /xe> rovs
#eo> 4 , CCt^
lirel KOI cri) eKKOTnjo-y.
^ aTTicrrta, eyKevrpicrO
yap k<TTiv o Qebs TraXw kyKtvrpio ai avrous * et yap cri 24
l/c TT}? Acara fyvGiv efe/coTn?? aypieXaiou Acal Trapa (fivcrw
ets KaXXteXaio^, TTOCTO) ju,aXXoi^ oSrot oc /cara
ey/ce^rptcr^cro^rai rij JSta eXaia.
TttS aTTOTO/Ua 3 , CTTl 6 CTC
e, eaz> 23
Add Oi e .
off because of unbelief, and you
stand by the faith which they
had not. Be humble and fear
for yourselves.
777 aTTtor/a.J Comp. ver. 30. T-/?
TOVTWV aTTEideioi. They are datives
of the reason or cause, as in Soph.
Antig. 387. : o-^oXr) y aV ifieiv
eyw ralg
21. What was true of them is
still more true of you. The ori
ginal branches had a sort of
claim on God, and yet he did not
spare them. No, and he will not
spare you.
ov^ ffou fysiaeTo.i. ] Two other
readings, one of which is that of
the Textus Receptus, JU^TTWC ovde
rrov 0e/o-??rat, and JJH^KIOQ ovfie aov
<f>eicrerat, express, with different
degrees of emphasis, the same
meaning.
Let us cast a look over the
connexion of the last ten verses.
At ver. 12. the Apostle had
spoken of the " diminishing of
the Israelite " being the " enrich
ment of the Gentile." This led
to the thought of the still greater
gain which was to accrue to the
Gentile from the restoration of
the Israelite. Therefore also the
restoration of Israel naturally
formed a part of that Gospel
which he preached among the
Gentiles. And that Gospel he
would make much of and thrust
forward, if only that it might
react upon his countrymen.
For that Israel would be
restored was as true as that
the firstfruits consecrated the
lump, or that the root implied
the tree. And the Gentile should
remember that he was not the
original stock, but the branch
which was afterwards grafted in.
Still the Apostle observes a loop
hole in the argument through
which Gentile pretensions may
creep in. He may say, Granted;
I am not the root only the branch,
but it was they who gave place
to me ; they were cut off that I
might be grafted in. Good, says
the Apostle, learn of them but
another lesson. Not " they were
cut off that I might be grafted
in;" but " I may be cut off too."
VER. 1924.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
311
19 not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then,
The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed
20 in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off,
and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but
21 fear : for if God spared not the natural branches, take
22 heed lest he also spare not thee. Behold therefore the
goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, seve
rity; but toward thee, goodness, the goodness of God 1
if thou continue in his goodness : otherwise thou also
23 shalt be cut off. And they also, if they abide not in
unbelief, shall be graffed in : for God is able to graff
24 them in again. For if thou wert cut out of the olive
tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary
to nature into a good olive tree : how much more shall
these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into
Om. of God.
22. Behold, a twofold lesson :
mercy and severity ; mercy to
you, severity to them. And yet
this lesson is one that may make
you rejoice with trembling ; for
you may yet change places.
Like SiKaiocrvi ri, ^apic, OeXrjpa,
and other words, xfirjaroTriG is
used in this passage, for the ef
fect as well as the cause ; for the
state produced in man, as well as
for the goodness of God, which
produces that state. " Mercy if
you abide in his mercy," is said
in the same way as grace if you
abide in his grace. See Essay on
Abstract ideas of the New Tes
tament, at the end of ch. ii.
For the change in construc
tion from the accusative to the
nominative, compare chapter ii.
7,8.
7Ti Kai <rv.] Since, if you do
not ; an elliptical form of expres
sion in which the protasis is
supplied from the connexion.
V. 6. 7Tt >
yverai
23. You shall change places ;
you shall be cut off, and they, if
they cease from unbelief, shall
be grafted in. For it is only
their unbelief, and not any defect
in the power of God, that pre
vents their being again en
grafted.
Comp. 2 Cor. iii. 15, 16., "But
even unto this day, when Moses
is read, the veil is upon their
heart. Nevertheless, when he
shall turn to the Lord, the veil
shall be taken away."
24. is an amplification of 23.,
" God is able to graft them in
again." It is an easier and more
natural thing to restore them to
their own olive, than to graft
you into it. It is uncertain, and
is of no great importance, whe
ther ol is the article or the re-
x 4
312
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CM. XT.
t, TO
ort
rovro, 25
Ov yap de\o) u/m? dyvotiv, a
Iva JUT) rjre Trap 9 eavrots (j^povi^oi, on Trojpcoo is CCTTO
TO) Io-pa7j\ yeyovev a^pis ov TO 7T\ijpo)fJia TOJV iQv&v eto~-
Kal ouTa>5 Tras I(T/)a^X craj^creTat, Ka#a>9 yeypa- 26
1 Add icaf.
lative ; whether, that is, the
last clause is to be translated,
" How much more shall these
who are the natural branches be
engrafted in their own olive ?"
or, "How much more shall
these (i. e. be engrafted), who
will be engrafted according to
nature in their own olive ? "
25. For I would have you
know, brethren, that this is the
secret purpose of God.
Comp. Eph. iii. 36. : " How
that by revelation he made
known unto me the mystery ;
. . . which in other ages was
not made known unto the sons
of men, as it is now revealed
unto his holy apostles and pro
phets by the Spirit ; that the
Gentiles should be fellow heirs,
and of the same body."
/zvtm/joiov,] in reference to the
heathen mysteries, is a revealed
secret, a secret into which a
person is admitted, not one from
which they are excluded. Ana
logous to this is the use of
p-vrrrripioi in the New Testament.
It is applied to a secret which
God has revealed, known to
some and not to others, mani
fested in the latter days, but
hidden previously. Thus the
Gospel is spoken of in Matt,
xiii. 11. as the mystery of the
kingdom of God. So Rom. xvi.
25. : " Now to him that is able
to stablish you according to my
Gospel, and the preaching of
Jesus Christ, according to the
revelation of the mystery, which
hath been kept silent through
endless ages." In Eph. v. 2.
the rite of marriage is spoken
of as a great mystery, typifying
Christ and the Church. So
" the mystery of godliness," 1
Tim. iii. 16. ; the mystery of
iniquity, 2 Thess. ii. 7. ; " the
mystery of the seven stars," Rev.
i. 20.; "Mystery Babylon the
great," xvii. 5. In all these pas
sages reference is made: (1.)
to what is wonderful ; or, (2.) to
what is veiled under a figure ;
or, (3.) to what has been long
concealed or is so still to the
multitude of mankind ; and in
all there is the correlative idea
of revelation. The use of the
word pvart ipiov in Scripture, af
fords no grounds for the popu
lar application of the term
" mystery " to the truths of the
Christian religion. It means
not what is, but what was a se
cret, into which, if we may use
heathen language, the believer
has become initiated, which there
is no purpose to conceal from
mankind; rather which he "would
not have other men ignorant of : "
so far as it remains a secret it is
so because it is spiritually dis
cerned, and some Christians, or
those who are not Christians,
have not the power of discern
ment.
tVa fjLrj fire Trap zavrolg
VER. 25, 26.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
313
5 their own olive tree? For I would not, brethren, that
ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be
wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is
happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be
26 come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer ; l he
And.
/not.] The present position of the
Gentiles in relation to the Jews
was temporary and accidental ;
it was not to be made a ground
of boasting for any.
TTwpwo-ig a? ^if poue,] a partial
hardening of the heart. Whether
the Apostle means " a hardening
of heart" which came over a
part of Israel, or a degree of har
dening of heart coming over the
whole people, is not expressed.
The Apostle is arguing against
the Gentiles being puffed up, and
at the same time extenuating the
fault of his countrymen. " For
I would wish you to know,
brethren, that this rejection of
the Jews is not total, but partial ;
it is but for a time, until the
number of the Gentiles is filled
up."
7r\/7pwjua rUtv tOrah ,] the full
number of the Gentiles, all that
were contained in the purposes
of God ; like TrXtjpwpa TOV xpovov,
Gal. iv. 4.
etore Xfy.] Compare Heb. iii. 19.
where, as here, the word is used
absolutely. The first portion of
ver. 25. is closely connected with
ver, 26. ; the mystery was not so
much the partial rejection of
Israel as their final salvation.
26. Trcie lo-pcu/X,] i. e. the Is
raelites who are hardened, as
well as those who believe.
It is evident, by the opposition
to the Gentiles that St. Paul is
here speaking, not of the spi
ritual, but of the literal Israel.
His words should not, however,
be so pressed as to imply uni
versal salvation, which was not
in his thoughts. The language
of prophecy, and the feelings of
his own heart, alike told him that
Israel should be saved. But he
is thinking of the nation which
is to be accepted as a whole, not
of the individuals who composed
it. It may be said that even in
this modified sense the words of
the prophecy or aspiration have
not been fulfilled. We must an
swer, no more has the Apostle s
belief in the immediate coming
of Christ ; it was the near wish
and prayer of his heart, but in
its accomplishment far off, and
to be realised only in the final
victory of good over evil.
Modern criticism detaches the
meaning of the Apostle from the
event of the prophecy. It has
no need to pervert his words,
from a determination as it may be
called, such as Luther expresses,
that the Jews shall not be saved,
or with Calvin to transfer them
to the Israel of God, because the
time seems to have passed for
their literal fulfilment. Happy
would it have been for the for-
314
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
XL
TO)
Ia/cto/3 * Kal avTrj avrot? 77 nap* /JLOV SiaOjjKT], OTav a^>e- 27*
Xw/xac ras d/*a/mas avTwv. Kara pev TO evayyeXwv iyOpol 28
t v//,a?, Kara Se TT)^ K\oyrjv dyaTrrjTol Sia rovs Trarepa?
dfJLTafJL\rjTa yap ra papier para Kal 77 K\IJ<TL<S TOV Oeov. 29
ajcTTrep yap 1 v/xets TTOTC rjireiurj era/re ra> uea>, ^i)^ Se 77X677- so
^77x6 r>7 TOUTW^ aTreiOeia, OVTOJS Kal OVTOL vvv rjirtiOrjorav si
eXeet, IVa Acal avroi [vw] 2 IXerjOwcnv crvve- 32
yap 6 ^eog rovs Tra^ra? eis direWeiaiv, Iva rou
2 Om. vD^.
sake of their fathers, whom God
loved.
Compare Philo (De Justitia,
ii. 366. Mangey), where he says
that God will always show mercy
to the Jewish people, because of
the virtues of the patriarchs;
and (De Exsec. ii. 436.), that
God will receive their prayers
for their descendants.
29. auerapeXrjra yap ra \api-
arpara Kal // K\i)cri<; rov S sou.] In
the same spirit in which the
Apostle says, " He that hath be
gun a good work in you, will
continue it to the end ; " he says,
also, in reference not to indi
viduals, but to nations, " God is
unchangeable, what He has once
given, He cannot take back ;
those whom He has once called,
He will not cast out." We know
what the Apostle teaches else
where, that the gifts and calling
of God are not irrespective of
our acceptance and obedience.
But in this passage he makes
abstraction of the condition ; he
thinks only of the purpose of God,
who is not a man that He should
change His will arbitrarily, and
be one thing one day, and another
thing another, to the objects of
His favour. He feels that God
cannot desert the work of His
hands. Neither need we stop to
1 Add iraf.
tunes of the Jewish race and the
honour of the Christian name
had they never been wrongly
applied ! (See on ver. 32.)
ycypairrat.] The words quoted
are from Isaiah, lix. 20., a Mes
sianic prophecy. The citation is
not exact, as in the LXX. we
read, instead of e/c Siwr, tvtKtv
2twv. In the Hebrew the dif
ference is greater, the meaning
being, " The Redeemer shall
come to Zion and unto them
that turn from transgression in
Jacob."
27. The remaining clause, orav
a0eAw/Jcu TCIQ apapriaQ avrah , is
taken, with the alteration of a
letter, from Isaiah, xxvii. 9., the
former part of which verse nearly
resembles the quotation which
precedes: ()ta rovro a0atpg0?/-
af.TO.1 avopia. Ia/cw/3, Kal rovro kanv
// evXoyia. aurov, orciv a^t Xwjuat
r))v ajjiapriav aiirov. Avrrj is ex
plained by the words orav a<pe-
Xwjuat, "This," viz., "when or
that I take away their sins;" cf.
1 John, v. 2.
28. Their case, the Apostle
says, may be looked at in two
ways. In reference to the Gos
pel, they are rejected (i-^Opoi),
and this you must regard as a
part of the mercy of God to you ;
but they are still elect for the
VEE. 2732.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
315
2 7 shall turn away ungodlinesses* from Jacob: and* this is
my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their
28 sins. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for
your sakes: but as touching the election, they are be-
29 loved for the fathers sakes. For the gifts and calling
so of God are without repentance. For as ye in times
past have disobeyed* God, yet have now obtained mercy
31 through their disobedience*: even so have these also
now not believed through mercy to you*, that they
32 also now 1 may obtain mercy. For God shut* up all
together in unbelief, that he may * have mercy upon
all.
1 Om. now.
reason whether or in what way
this is reconcilable with the Di
vine justice. The whole relations
of man to God and nature can
never be perceived at once : we
see them " in part " " through a
glass," under many aspects, of
which this is one.
30. God has inverted the order
of things ; you were once disobe
dient, and now He has made their
disobedience a source of mercy to
you.
3 1. " So they are disobedient (1.)
by reason of the mercy shown to
you, that they also may themselves
receive mercy ; " or (2.) " that they
may receive mercy by reason of
the mercy shown to you." The
latter way of construing gives
the most point to the passage ;
the former agrees best with the
order of words and the paral
lelism of the previous clause.
32. o-vreVAeiaej ,] shut up : the
avv is emphatic. Compare Gal.
iii. 22., (TvvtK\eiffv // ypcujfr)} ra
Trarra v^ apapriav. verse 23.
itipovpovvTO ffvyKXeio/nevoi.
Such is the conclusion of the
doctrinal portion of the Epistle.
God concluded all under sin, as
was shown in the first chapters,
" that he might have mercy upon
all." The steps by which the
Apostle has arrived at this con
clusion, might be termed in mo
dern language, " an argument
from analogy." In the Old Tes
tament the younger was preferred
to the elder, and God seemed to
deal with men irrespective of
their, actions, and in the utter
subversion of the true religion a
remnant was still preserved. We
may argue from the ways of God
then, to the ways of God now.
But, again, the very rejection of
the Jews is a kind of argument
from analogy for their acceptance :
what they were, the Gentiles are;
therefore, what the Gentiles are,
they will become. And if the
chosen are rejected, "a fortiori"
shall they be again accepted. They
have in them the root, the germ,
the firstfruits of holiness, in the
patriarchs who are their fathers,
and in the true Israel who have
already received the Gospel. It
is in accordance with the prin
ciple formerly laid down by the
316
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. XI.
TroWa? IXeyo- fl. w fidOos TT\OVTOV Kal crofyias Kal y^wcrews 33
Oeov, o)<s dve^epevvrjra TO, Kpi^ara avrov Kal dv^i^yiacrroi
al oSol avTOv. Tts yap !yz>a) vovv Kvpiov ; ^ ris CTVJJL- 34
/3ovXos avrov eyevero ; r) TL<$ irpoeStoKev avrq), Kal aVra- 35
erat aurw; on ef aurov Kat 01 avrov Kal eis 36
ra TrdVra avro) rj Sofa eis rovs aiowa?, d
Apostle, " where sin abounded,
grace did much more abound,"
that their rejection should be the
hope of their salvation.
And yet it will be urged, and
cannot be denied, that the Jewish
people are as they were ; in the
language of the Apostle, " even
unto this day when Moses is read
the veil is upon their hearts "
(2 Cor. iii. 15.). Judging hu
manly, might we not say that
every century, if it has not in
creased their animosity to the
Gospel, has rendered more inve
terate those differences of thought
and habit, which to nations as to
men become a second nature, and
cannot be laid aside ? How is
this to be reconciled with the
language of the Apostle ? Rather
let us admit that it is not to be
reconciled, and yet that the truth
of the Gospel may remain with
us still. It is " I," not the Lord,
who am speaking, as an Israelite
of Israelites, within the circle of
the Jewish dispensation, after
the manner of the time, accord
ing to the received mode of in
terpreting prophecy in the schools
of Philo and the Rabbis. " I
cannot but utter what I hope and
feel." There is no irreverence in
supposing that St. Paul, who
after the lapse of a few years
looked, not for the coming of
Christ, but rather for his own
departure to be with Christ,
would have changed his manner
of speech when, after eighteen
centuries, he found " all things
remaining as they were from the
beginning." His spirit itself bids
us read his writings not in the
letter but in the spirit. He who
felt his views of God s purposes
gradually extending, who read the
voice within him by the light of
daily experience, could never have
found fault with us for not at
tempting to reach beyond the ho
rizon within which God has shut
us up.
33. is wrongly translated in the
English Version, "O the depth
of the riches, both of the wisdom
and knowledge of God." There is
no meaning in the word " both,"
because there is no opposition
between " the wisdom and know
ledge of God." The expression
TrXovTOQ $eov, in the attempt to
get rid of which the mistransla
tion has probably arisen, is suffi
ciently defended by Phil. iv. 19.,
JJ.OV TrXrjpwaei Traaav
Kara TO TT\OVTOQ av
rov. Compare TT\OVTOQ eOrwv for
the metaphorical use of the word
7rXoi)roc, which may be well ap
plied to God, who is " the author
VER. 3336.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
317
33 the depth of the riches and* the wisdom and
knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judg-
34 ments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath
known the mind of the Lord ? or who hath been his
35 counsellor? or who hath first given to him, and it shall
36 be recompensed unto him again ? For of him, and
through him, and to him, are all things: to him* be
glory for ever. Amen.
of every good and perfect "gift,"
and " who giveth to all men libe
rally, and upbraideth not." As
ao(j)ia and yv&ffiQ are connected
with ver. 34., so TT\OVTOQ with
ver. 35.
oro^ta and yv&ffig are opposed
chiefly as the more or less abstract
and general terms. Besides this,
aotyia may be described as the
intellectual quality most akin to
moral ones ; the word yvtiats im
plying the idea of acquired in
formation, or of knowledge not
naturally known. ao<f>ia Stov may
be referred to the general provi
dence of God ; y vuxrtQy to the know
ledge which he possessed of all
his works from the beginning :
the first answers to a i^ovAoc,
the second to rove Kvpiov, in the
34th verse. Compare Theodoret
(quoted by Fritsche) : ra rp/a ravra
TTpoQ TO. rpia reOeiKt, TOV TT\OVTOV
KCU rr\v ffo<piav Kal Tt]v yv&aiv* TO
jutv TLQ iyvd) vovv Kvpiov TrpOQ TTJV
yvtiair, TO Se Tig avfj,ovXog CIVTOV
kyivtTO TrpoQ TVJV aotyiav, TO %e TIQ
TrpoeddtKev ai/rw KO.I avTCLTrocodrj-
(TETCU O.VTU) TTpOQ TOV TT\OVTOV.
At chapter ix. ver. 5., when
contemplating the former mercies
of God to Israel, he burst forth
into a doxology ; now, as be
holding the circle of his provi
dence complete, he is lost in
ecstasy. Jew and Gentile are
alike concluded under sin, that
they may be alike saved, and the
one takes the place of the other
for a season, only that the other
may be in turn restored. Who,
looking at the present state, or at
the past history of the world,
could have imagined this ? But
such are the ways of God, as set
forth to us by the prophet. (Is.
xl. 13., which is again quoted in
1 Cor. ii. 16.)
36. e avrov,] from Him all
things spring ; ci CLVTOV, by Him
they are maintained ; EIQ CL VTOV,
to Him they all tend. As if the
Apostle has said : He is the
beginning, middle, and end of all
things ; the source whence they
proceed ; the mean by which
they are wrought ; the end at
which they aim. This is the reason
why no man " hath first given to
him ;" for all things are his.
Comp. 1 Cor. viii. 6. : it, ov
TO. TravTa KOI r]jj.elQ EIQ O.VTQV.
318 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS .
CONTEASTS OF PROPHECY.
EVERY reader of the Epistles must have remarked the opposite and
apparently inconsistent uses, which the Apostle St. Paul makes of the
Old Testament. This appearance of inconsistency arises out of the
different and almost conflicting statements, which may be read in the
Old Testament itself. The law and the prophets are their own wit
nesses, but they are witnesses also to a truth which is beyond them.
Two spirits are found in them, and the Apostle sets aside the one,
that he may establish the other. When he says that "the man that
doeth these things shall live in them," x. 5., and again two verses
afterwards " the word is very nigh unto thee, even in thy mouth
and in thy heart," he is using the authority of the law, first, that
out of its own mouth he may condemn the law ; secondly, that he
may confirm the Gospel by the authority of that which he condemns.
Still more striking are the contrasts of prophecy in which he
reads, not only the rejection of Israel, but its restoration ; the over
ruling providence of God, as well as the free agency of man ;
not only as it is written, " God gave unto them a spirit of heaviness,"
but, " who hath believed our report ; " nor only, " all day long I have
stretched forth my hand to a disobedient and gainsaying people,"
but " there shall come out of Sion a deliverer and He shall turn away
iniquities from Jacob." Experience and faith seem to contend toge
ther in the Apostle s own mind, and alike to find an echo in the
two voices of prophecy.
It were much to be wished that we could agree upon a chrono
logical arrangement of the Old Testament, which would approach
more nearly to the true order in which the books were written, than
CONTRASTS OF PROPHECY. 319
that in which they have been handed down to us. Such an arrange
ment would throw great light on the interpretation of prophecy.
At present, we scarcely resist the illusion exercised upon our minds
by " four prophets the greater, followed by twelve prophets the less ;"
some of the latter being of a prior date to any of the former. Even
the distinction of the law and the prophets as well as of the Psalms
and the prophets leads indirectly to a similar error. For many
elements of the prophetical spirit enter into the law, and legal pre
cepts are repeated by the prophets. The continuity of Jewish
history is further broken by the Apocrypha. The four centuries
before Christ were as fruitful of hopes and struggles and changes of
thought and feeling in the Jewish people as any preceding period
of their existence as a nation, perhaps more so. And yet we piece
together the Old and New Testament as if the interval were blank
leaves only. Few if any English writers have ever attempted to
form a conception of the growth of the spirit of prophecy, from its
first beginnings in the law itself, as it may be traced in the lives and
characters of Samuel and David, and above all, of Elijah and his
immediate successor ; as it reappears a few years later, in the writ
ten prophecies respecting the house of Israel, and the surrounding
nations (not even in the oldest of the prophets, without reference to
Messiah s kingdom) ; or again after the carrying away of the ten
tribes, as it concentrates itself in Judah, uttering a sadder and more
mournful cry in the hour of captivity, yet in the multitude of
sorrows increasing the comfort ; the very dispersion of the people
widening the prospect of Christ s kingdom, as the nation " is cut
short in righteousness," God being so much the nearer to those who
draw near to Him.
Other reasons might be given why the study of the prophetical
writings has made little progress among us. It often seems as if the
only thing which could properly be the subject of study, namely, the
meaning of prophecy, as it presented itself to the prophet s own mind
had been wholly lost sight of. There has been a jealousy of attempts
to explain by contemporary history what we would rather regard as a
320 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
light from heaven shining on some distant future. We have been
unwilling to receive any help, however imperfect, toward the better
understanding of the nature of prophecy, which might be drawn
from the comparison of " the religion of the Gentiles." No account
has been taken of prophecy as a gift of the mind, common to early
stages of the world and of society, and to no other. The material
imagery which was its mode of thought (" I saw the Lord high and
lifted up, and his throne also filled the temple "), is resolved into
poetical ornament. The description in the prophecies themselves, of
the manner in which the prophet received the word of the Lord,
whether by seeing of the eye or hearing of the ear, and in which he
wrote it down and uttered it, has also been little considered. The
repetitions of the earlier prophets in the later ones have been noted
only as parallel passages in the margin of the Bible. Principles of
interpretation have been assumed, resting on no other basis than the
practice of interpreters. The fulfilment of prophecy has been sought
for in a series of events which have been sometimes bent to make
them fit, and one series of events has frequently taken the place
of another. Even the passing circumstances of to-day or yester
day, at the distance of about two thousand years, and as many
miles, which are but shadows flitting on the mountains compared with
the deeper foundations of human history, are thought to be within the
range of the prophet s eye. And it may be feared that, in attempt
ing to establish a claim which, if it could be proved, might be made
also for heathen oracles and prophecies, commentators have some
times lost sight of those great characteristics which distinguish
Hebrew prophecy from all other professing revelations of other
religions : (1.) the sense of the truthfulness, and holiness, and loving-
kindness of the Divine Being, with which the prophet is as one
possessed, which he can no more forget or doubt than he can cease
to be himself ; (2.) their growth, that is, their growing perception of
the moral nature of the revelation of God to man, apart from the com
mandments of the law or the privileges of the house of Israel.
It would be a great external help to the perception of this increasing
CONTRASTS OF PROPHECY. 321
purpose of prophecy, if the study of the prophetic writings were
commenced with an inquiry into the order in which the books of the
Old Testament follow one another. Yet, in the present day, how
could we come to an understanding about the first principles upon
which such an inquiry ought to be conducted ? Not the prophecies
only, but the superstructures of interpreters of prophecy, would be
considered. Nor does criticism seem equal to the task of arranging,
on grounds often of internal evidence alone, not merely books, but
parts of books, in their precise order. Even the real arguments that
might be urged in favour of a particular arrangement, arising out of
doubtful considerations, or considerations of a kind which, however
certain, are hardly appreciable to any but critical scholars, could not
be expected to prevail when weighed in the balance against religious
feelings or the supposed voice of antiquity or agreement of the
Christian world.
The difficulty of arranging the prophecies of the Old Testament
in an exact chronological order, need not, however, prevent our
recognising general differences in their spirit and structure, such as
arise, partly out of the circumstances under which they were written
at different periods of Jewish history, partly also out of a difference
of feeling in contemporary prophets ; sometimes from what may be
termed the action and reaction in the prophet s own mind, which even
in the same prophecy will not allow him to forget that the God of
judgment remembers mercy. There are some prophecies more
national, of which the fortunes of the Jewish people are the only
subject; others more individual, seeming to enter more into the
recesses of the human soul, and which are, at the same time, more
universal, rising above earthly things, and passing into the distant
heaven. At one time the prophet embodies " these thoughts of
many hearts " as present, at another as future ; in some cases as
following out of the irrevocable decree of God, in others as depen
dent on the sin or repentance of man. At one moment he is looking
for the destruction of Israel, at another for its consolation ; going
from one of these aspects of the heavenly vision to another, like
VOL. II. Y
322 EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
St. Paul himself in successive verses. And sometimes he sees the
Lord s house exalted in the top of the mountains, and the image of
the "Wonderful Counsellor, the Mighty Prince, the Everlasting God."
At other times, his vision is of the Servant whom it " pleased the Lord
to bruise," whose form was " marred more than that of the sons of
men," who was " led as a lamb to the slaughter."
National, individual, spiritual, temporal, present, future, re
jection, restoration, faith, the law, Providence, freewill, mercy,
sacrifice, Messiah suffering and triumphant, are so many pairs of
opposites with reference to which the structure of prophecy admits
of being examined. It is true that such an examination is nothing
more than a translation or decomposition of prophecy into the modes
of thought of our own time, and is far from reproducing the living
image which presented itself to the eyes of the prophet. But, like
all criticism, it makes us think ; it enables us to observe fresh points
of connexion between the Old Testament and the New ; it keeps us
from losing our way in the region of allegory or of modern history.
Many things are unlearnt as well as learnt by the aid of criticism ;
it clears the mind of conventional interpretations, teaching us to
look amid the symbols of time and place for the higher and universal
meaning.
Prophecy has a human as well as a divine element : that is to say,
it partakes of the ordinary workings of the mind. There is also
something beyond which the analogy of human knowledge fails to
explain. Could the prophet himself have been asked what was the
nature of that impulse by which he was carried away, he would
have replied that " the God of Israel was a living God " who had
" ordained him a prophet before he came forth from the womb." Of
the divine element no other account can be given ; " it pleased God
to raise up individuals in a particular age and country, who had a
purer and loftier sense of truth than their fellow men." Prophecy
would be no longer prophecy if we could untwist its soul. But the
human part admits of being analysed like poetry or history, of which
it is a kind of union ; it is written with a man s pen in a known
CONTRASTS OF PROPHECY. 323
language ; it is cast in the imaginative form of early language itself.
The truth of God comes into contact with the world, clothing itself
in human feelings, revealing the lesson of historical events. But
human feelings and the lesson of events vary, and in this sense the
prophetic lesson varies too. Even in the workings of our own minds
we may perceive this ; those who think much about themselves and
God cannot but be conscious of great changes and transitions of
feeling at different periods of life. We are the creatures of impres
sions and associations ; and although Providence has not made our
knowledge of himself dependent on these impressions, he has allowed
it to be coloured by them. We cannot say that in the hours of
prosperity and adversity, in health and sickness, in poverty and
wealth, our sense of God s dealings with us is absolutely the same ;
still less, that all our prayers and aspirations have received the
answer that we wished or expected. And sometimes the thoughts of
our own hearts go before to God ; at other times, the power of God
seems to anticipate the thoughts of our hearts. And sometimes, in
looking back at our past lives, it seems as if God had done every
thing ; at other times, we are conscious of the movement of our own
will. The wide world itself also, and the political fortunes of our
country have been enveloped in the light or darkness which rested
on our individual soul.
Especially are we liable to look at religious truth under many
aspects, if we live amid changes of religious opinions, or are wit
nesses of some revival or reaction in religion, or supposing our lot to
be cast in critical periods of history, such as extend the range and
powers of human nature, or certainly enlarge our experience of it.
Then the germs of new truths will subsist side by side with the
remains of old ones ; and thoughts that are really inconsistent, will
have a place together in our minds, without our being able to per
ceive their inconsistency. The inconsistency will be traced by pos
terity ; they will remark that up to a particular point we saw clearly ;
but that no man is beyond his age there was a circle which we
could not pass. And some one living in our own day may look into
324 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
the future with " eagle eye ; " he may weigh and balance with a sort
of omniscience the moral forces of the world, perhaps with some
thing too much of confidence that the right will ultimately prevail
even on earth ; and after ages may observe that his predictions were
not always fulfilled or not fulfilled at the time he said.
Such general reflections may serve as an introduction to what at
first appears an anomaly in prophecy, that it has not one, but many
lessons ; and that the manner in which it teaches those lessons is
through the alternations of the human soul itself. There are failings
of prophecy, just as there are failings in our own anticipations of the
future. And sometimes when we had hoped to be delivered it has
seemed good to God to afflict us still. But it does not follow that
religion is therefore a cunningly devised fable, either now or then.
Neither the faith of the people, nor of the prophet, is shaken in the
God of their fathers because the prophecies are not realised before
their eyes ; because " the vision," as they said, " is delayed ;" because
in many cases events seem to occur which make it impossible that it
should be accomplished. A true instinct still enables them to sepa
rate the prophets of Jehovah from the numberless false prophets
with whom the land swarmed ; they are gifted with the " same
discernment of spirits " which distinguished Micaiah from the 400
whom Ahab called. The internal evidence of the true prophet we
are able to recognise in the written prophecies also. In the ear
liest as well as the latest of them there is the same spirit one and
continuous, the same witness of the invisible God, the same character
of the Jewish people, the same law of justice and mercy in the deal
ings of Providence with respect to them, the same " walking with
God " in the daily life of the prophet himself.
" Novum Testamentum in vetere latet," has come to be a favourite
word among theologians, who have thought they saw in the truths
of the Gospel the original design as well as the evangelical applica
tion of the Mosaical law. With a deeper meaning, it may be said
that prophecy grows out of itself into the Gospel. Not, as some
extreme critics have conceived, that the facts of the Gospel history
CONTRASTS OF PROPHECY. 325
are but the crystallisation of the imagery of prophecy. Say, rather,
that the river of the water of life is beginning again to flow. The
Son of God himself is " that prophet " the prophet, not of one nation
only, but of all mankind, in whom the particularity of the old pro
phets is finally done away, and the ever-changing form of the
" servant in whom my soul delighteth " at last finds rest. St. Paul,
too, is a prophet who has laid aside the poetical and authoritative
garb of old times, and is wrapped in the rhetorical or dialectical one
of his own age. The language of the old prophets comes unbidden
into his mind ; it seems to be the natural expression of his own
thoughts. Separated from Joel, Amos, Hosea, Micah, and Isaiah by
an interval of about 800 years, he finds their words very near to
him " even in his mouth and his heart ; " that is the word which he
preached. When they spoke of forgiveness of sins, of non-impu
tation of sins, of a sudden turning to God, what did this mean but
righteousness by faith ? when they said "I will have mercy, and not
sacrifice," here also was imaged the great truth, that salvation was
not of the law. If St. Paul would have " no man judged for a new
moon or sabbath," the prophets of old time had again and again
said in the name of Jehovah " Your new moons and sabbaths I can
not away with." Like the elder prophets, he came not "to build up
a temple made with hands," but to teach a moral truth ; like them he
went forth alone, and not in connexion with the Church at Jeru
salem. His calling is to be Apostle of the Gentiles ; they also
sometimes pass beyond the borders of Israel, to receive Egypt and
Assyria into covenant with God.
It is not, however, this deeper unity between St. Paul and the
prophets of the old dispensation that we are about to consider
further, but a more superficial parallelism, which is afforded by the
alternation or successive representation of the purposes of God
towards Israel, which we meet with in the Old Testament, and which
recurs in the Epistles to the Romans. Like the elder prophets, St.
Paul also " prophesies in part," feeling after events rather than see
ing them, and divided between opposite aspects of the dealings of
y 3
326 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
Providence with mankind. This changing feeling often finds an
expression in the words of Isaiah or the Psalmist, or the author of the
book of Deuteronomy. Hence a kind of contrast springs up in the
writings of the Apostle, which admits of being traced to its source
in the words of the prophets. Portions of his Epistles are the dis
jecta membra of prophecy. Oppositions are brought into view by
him, and may be said to give occasion to a struggle in his own mind,
which were unobserved by the prophets themselves. For so far from
prophecy setting forth one unchanging purpose of God, it seems
rather to represent a succession of purposes conditional on men s
actions ; speaking as distinctly of the rejection as of the restoration
of Israel ; and of the restoration almost as the correlative of the re
jection; often too making a transition from the temporal to the spi
ritual. Some of these contrasts it is proposed to consider in detail
as having an important bearing on St. Paul s Epistles, especially
on the Epistles to the Thessalonians, and on chapters x. xii. of
the Epistles to the Eomans.
(1.) All the prophets are looking for and hastening to " the day of
the Lord," the " great day," " which there is none like," " the day
of the Lord s sacrifice," the " day of visitation," of " the great
slaughter," in which the Lord shall judge "in the valley of Jehosha-
phat," in which " they shall go into the clefts of the rocks and into
the tops of the ragged rocks for fear of the Lord, and for the glory
of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth." That
day is the fulfilment and realisation of prophecy, without which it
would cease to have any meaning, just as religion itself would cease
to have any meaning to ourselves, were there no future life, or retri
bution of good and evil. All the prophets are in spirit present at
it ; living alone with God, and hardly mingling with men on earth,
they are fulfilled with its terrors and its glories. For the earth is not
to go on for ever as it is, the wickednesses of the house of Israel are
not to last for ever. First, the prophet sees the pouring out of the
vials of wrath upon them ; then, more at a distance, follows the vision
of mercy, in which they are to be comforted, and their enemies, the
CONTRASTS OF PROPHECY. 327
ministers of God s vengeance on them, in turn punished. And evil and
oppression everywhere, so far as it comes within the range of the
prophet s eye, is to be punished in that day, and good is to prevail.
In these " terrors of the day of the Lord," of which the prophets
speak, the fortunes of the Jewish people mingle with another vision
of a more universal judgment, and it has been usual to have recourse
to the double senses of prophecy to separate the one from the other,
an instrument of interpretation which has also been applied to the
New Testament for the same purpose. Not in this way could the
prophet or apostle themselves have conceived them. To them they
were not two, but one ; not " double one against the other," or
separable into the figure and the thing signified. For the figure is
in early ages the mode of conception also. More true would it be
to say that the judgments of God on the Jewish people were an an
ticipation or illustration of his dealings with the world generally. If
a separation is made at all, let us rather separate the accidents of
time and place from that burning sense of the righteousness of God,
which somewhere we cannot tell where, at some time we cannot tell
when, must and will have retribution on evil ; which has this other
note of its divine character, that in judgment it remembers mercy,
pronouncing no endless penalty or irreversible doom, even upon the
house of Israel. This twofold lesson of goodness and severity speaks
to us as well as to the Jews. Better still to receive the words of
prophecy as we have them, and to allow the feeling which it utters
to find its way to our hearts, without stopping to mark out what
was not separated in the prophet s own mind and cannot therefore
be divided by us.
Other contrasts are traceable in the teaching of the prophets
respecting the day of the Lord. In that day the Lord is to judge
Israel, and he is to punish Egypt and Assyria ; and yet it is said also,
the Lord shall heal Egypt, and Israel shall be the third with Egypt
and Assyria whom the Lord shall bless. (Is. xix. 25.) In many of the
prophecies also the judgment is of two kinds ; it is a judgment on Is
rael, which is executed by the heathen ; it is a judgment against the
Y 4
328 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
heathen and in favour of Israel, in which God himself is sometimes
said to be their advocate as well as their judge " in that day." A
singular parallel with the New Testament is presented by another
contrast which occurs in a single passage. That the day of the Lord is
near, " it cometh, it cometh ;" is the language of all the prophets ; and
yet there were those who said also in Ezekiel s time, " The days are
prolonged, and every vision faileth ; tell them, therefore, thus saith
the Lord God ; I will make this proverb to cease, and they shall no
more use it as a proverb in Israel, but say unto them, The days are at
hand, and the effect of every vision." (xii. 22.) (Compare 2 Pet. iii. 4.,
" Where is the promise of bis coming ? ") On the other hand, in the
later chapters of Isaiah (xl. seq.) we seem to trace the same feeling
as in the New Testament itself: the anticipation of prophecy has
ceased ; the hour of its fulfilment has arrived ; men seem to be con
scious that they are living during the restoration of Israel as the
disciples at the day of Pentecost felt that they were living amid the
things spoken of by the prophet Joel.
(2.) A closer connexion with the Epistle to the Romans is fur
nished by the double and, on the surface, inconsistent language of
prophecy respecting the rejection and restoration of Israel. These
seem to follow one another often in successive verses. It is true that
the appearance of inconsistency is greater than the reality, owing
to the lyrical and concentrated style of prophecy (some of its greatest
works being not much longer than this " cobweb "* of an essay) ;
and this leads to opposite feelings and trains of thought being pre
sented to us together, without the preparations and joinings which
would be required in the construction of a modern poem. Yet, after
making allowance for this peculiarity of the ancient Hebrew style,
it seems as if there were two thoughts ever together in the prophet s
mind : captivity, restoration, judgment, mercy, sin, repentance,
" the people sitting in darkness, and the great light."
There are portions of prophecy in which the darkness is deep and
enduring, "darkness that may be felt," in which the prophet is
* Carlyle.
CONTRASTS OF PROPHECY. 329
living amid the sins and sufferings of the people ; and hope is a long
way off from them, when they need to be awakened rather than com
forted ; and things must be worse, as men say, before they can become
better. Such is the spirit of the greater part of the book of Jere
miah. But the tone of prophecy is on the whole that of alternation ;
God deals with the Israelites as with children ; he cannot bear to
punish them for long ; his heart comes back to them when they are
in captivity ; their very helplessness gives them a claim on him.
Vengeance may endure for a time, but soon the full tide of his
mercy returns upon them. Another voice is heard, saying, "Comfort
ye, comfort ye, my people." " Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem,
and say unto her that she hath received of the Lord s hand double
for all her sins." So from the vision of God on Mount Sinai, at the
giving of the Law amid storms and earthquakes, arises that tender
human relation in which the Gospel teaches that he stands, not
merely to his Church as a body, but to each one of us.
Naturally this human feeling is called forth most in the hour of
adversity. As the affliction deepens, the hope also enlarges, seeming
often to pass beyond the boundaries of this life into a spiritual world.
Though their sins are as scarlet, they shall be white as snow;
when Jerusalem is desolate, there shall be a tabernacle on Mount
Sion. The formula in which this enlargement of the purposes of
God is introduced, is itself worthy of notice. " It shall be no more
said, The Lord liveth, that brought up the children of Israel out of
the land of Egypt ; but, The Lord liveth, that brought up the
children of Israel from the land of the North, and from all the lands
whither he had driven them." Their old servitude in Egypt came
back to their minds now that they were captives in a strange land,
and the remembrance that they had already been delivered from it
was an earnest that they were yet to return. Deeply rooted in the
national mind, it had almost become an attribute of God himself
that he was their deliverer from the house of bondage.
With this narrower view of the return of the children of Israel
from captivity, not without a remembrance of that great empire
330 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
which had once extended from the River of Egypt to the Euphrates,
there blended also the hope of another kingdom in which dwelt
righteousness the kingdom of Solomon " become the kingdom of
Christ and God." The children of Israel had been in their origin
" the fewest of all people," and the most alien to the nations round
about. The Lord their God was a jealous God, who would not
suffer them to mingle with the idolatries of the heathen. And in
that early age of the world, when national life was so strong and
individuals so feeble, we cannot conceive how the worship of the
true God could have been otherwise preserved. But the day had
passed away when the nation could be trusted with the preservation
of the faith of Jehovah ; " it had never been good for much at any
time." The prophets, too, seem to withdraw from the scenes of poli
tical events ; they are no longer the judges and leaders of Israel ; it
is a part of their mission to commit to writing for the use of after
ages the predictions which they utter. We pass into another country,
to another kingdom in which the prospect is no more that which
Moses saw from Mount Pisgah, but in which the " Lord s horn is
exalted in the top of the mountains and all nations flock to it."
In this kingdom the Gentiles have a place, still on the outskirts,
but not wholly excluded from the circle of God s Providence. Some
times they are placed on a level with Israel, the " circumcised with
the uncircumcised," as if only to teach the Apostle s lesson, " that
there is no respect of persons with God." Jer. ix. 25, 26. ; compare
Rom. ii. 12 28. At other times they are themselves the subjects
of promises and threatenings. Jer. xii. 14 17. It is to them that
God will turn when His patience is exhausted with the rebellions of
Israel ; for whom it shall be " more tolerable " than for Israel and
Judah in the day of the Lord. They are those upon whom, though
at a distance, the brightness of Jehovah must overflow ; who, in the
extremities of the earth, are bathed with the light of His presence.
Helpers of the joy of Israel, they pour with gifts and offerings
through the open gates of the city of God. They have a part in
Messiah s kingdom, not of right, but because without them it would
CONTRASTS OF PEOPHECY. 331
be imperfect and incomplete. In one passage only, which is an
exception to the general spirit of prophecy, Israel " makes the third "
with Egypt and Assyria, " whom the Lord of Hosts shall bless."
Is. xix. 1825.
It was not possible that such should be the relation of the Gentiles
to the people of God in the Epistles of St. Paul. Experience seemed
to invert the natural order of Providence the Jew first and after
wards the Gentile. Accordingly, what is subordinate in the prophets,
becomes of principal importance in the application of the Apostle.
The dark sayings about the Gentiles had more meaning than the
utterers of them were aware of. Events connected them with the
rejection of the Jews, of which the same prophets spoke. Not only
had the Gentiles a place on the outskirts of the people of God,
gathering up the fragments of promises " under the table ; " they
themselves were the spiritual Israel. When the prophets spoke of
the Mount Sion, and all nations flowing to it, they were not expect
ing literally the restoration of the kingdom to Israel. They spoke
of they knew not what of something that had as yet no existence
upon the earth. What that was, the vision on the way to Damascus,
no less than the history of the Church and the world, revealed to
the Apostle of the Gentiles.
(3.) Another characteristic of Hebrew prophecy is the transition
from the nation to the individual. That is to say, first the nation
becomes an individual ; it is spoken of, thought of, dealt with, as a
person, it " makes the third " with God and the prophet. Almost a
sort of drama is enacted between them, the argument of which
is the mercy and justice of God ; and the Jewish nation itself has
many parts assigned to it. Sometimes she is the " adulterous
sister," the " wife of whoredoms," who has gone astray with Chaldean
and Egyptian lovers. In other passages, still retaining the same
personal relation to God, the " daughter of my people " is soothed
and comforted ; then a new vision rises before the prophet s mind,
not the same with that of the Jewish people, but not wholly
distinct from it, in which the suffering prophet himself, or Cyrus
332 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
the prophet king, have a part, the vision of " the servant of
God," "the Saviour with dyed garments " from Bosra ; "he shall
grow up before him as a tender plant ; " " he is led as a lamb
to the slaughter." Isaiah, liii. 2. 7. ; compare Jer. xi. 19. Yet
there is a kind of glory even on earth in this image of gentleness
and suffering. "A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking
flax shall he not quench, until he hath brought forth judgment unto
victory." We feel it to be strange, and yet it is true. So we have
sometimes seen the image of the kingdom of God among ourselves,
not in noble churches or scenes of ecclesiastical power or splendour,
but in the face of some child or feeble person, who, after overcoming
agony, is about to depart and be with Christ.
Analogies from Greek philosophy may seem far-fetched in refer
ence to Hebrew prophecy, yet there are particular points in which
subjects the most dissimilar receive a new light from one another.
In the writings of Plato and Aristotle, and the philosophers who
were their successors, moral truths gradually separate from politics,
and the man is acknowledged to be different from the mere citizen :
and there arises a sort of ideal of the individual, who has a responsi
bility to himself only. The growth of Hebrew prophecy is so
different ; its figures and modes of conception are so utterly unlike ;
there seems such a wide gulf between morality which almost ex
cludes God, and religion which exists only in God, that at first
sight we are unwilling to allow any similarity to exist between
them. Yet an important point in both of them is really the same.
For the transition from the nation to the individual is also the more
perfect revelation of God himself, the change from the temporal to
the spiritual, from the outward glories of Messiah s reign to the
kingdom of God which is within. Prophets as well as apostles
teach the near intimate personal relation of man to God. The
prophet and psalmist, who is at one moment inspired with the feelings
of a whole people, returns again to God to express the lowliest sor
rows of the individual Christian. The thought of the Israel of God
is latent in prophecy itself, not requiring a great nation or com-
CONTRASTS OF PROPHECY. 333
pany of believers ; " but where one is " there is God present with
him.
There is another way also in which the individual takes the place
of the nation in the purposes of God ; " a remnant shall be saved."
In the earlier books of the Old Testament, the whole people is
bound up together for good or for evil. In the law especially, there
is no trace that particular tribes or individuals are to be singled
out for the favour of God. Even their great men are not so much
individuals as representatives of the whole people. They serve God
as a nation ; as a nation they go astray. If, in the earlier times of
Jewish history, we suppose an individual good man living " amid an
adulterous and crooked generation," we can scarcely imagine the re
lation in which he would stand to the blessings and cursings of the
law. Would the righteous perish with the wicked ? That be " far
from thee, O Lord." Yet " prosperity, the blessing of the Old
Testament," was bound up with the existence of the nation. Gra
dually the germ of the new dispensation begins to unfold itself;
the bands which held the nation together are broken in pieces ; a
fragment only is preserved, a branch, in the Apostle s language, cut
off from the patriarchal stem, to be the beginning of another Israel.
The passage quoted by St. Paul in the eleventh chapter of the
Romans is the first indication of this change in God s mode of
dealing with his people. The prophet Elijah wanders forth into
the wilderness to lay before the Lord the iniquities of the people :
" The children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down
thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword." " But what,"
we may ask with the Apostle, " saith the answer of God to him ? "
Not " They are corrupt, they are altogether become abominable,"
but " Yet I have seven thousand men who have not bowed the
knee to Baal." The whole people were not to be regarded as one ;
there were a few who still preserved, amid the general corruption,
the worship of the true God.
The marked manner in which the answer of God is introduced,
the contrast of the " still small voice " with the thunder, the storm,
334 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
and the earthquake, the natural symbols of the presence of God in
the law, the contradiction of the words spoken to the natural bent
of the prophet s mind, and the greatness of Elijah s own character
all tend to stamp this passage as marking one of the epochs of
prophecy. The solitude of the prophet and his separation in " the
mount of God," from the places in which "men ought to worship,"
are not without meaning. There had not always " been this proverb
in the house of Israel ; " but from this time onwards it is repeated again
and again. We trace the thought of a remnant to be saved in cap
tivity, or to return from captivity, through a long succession of
prophecies, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel ; it is
the text of almost all the prophets, passing, as a familiar word, from
the Old Testament to the New. The voice uttered to Elijah was
the beginning of this new Revelation.
(4.) Coincident with the promise of a remnant is the precept, " I will
have mercy and not sacrifice," which, in modern language, opposes
the moral to the ceremonial law. It is another and the greatest step
onward towards the spiritual dispensation. Moral and religious
truths hang together ; no one can admit one of them in the highest
sense, without admitting a principle which involves the rest. He
who acknowledged that God was a God of mercy and not of sacrifice,
could not long have supposed that he dealt with nations only, or
that he raised men up for no other end but to be vessels of his wrath
or monuments of his vengeance. For a time there might be " things
too hard for him," clouds resting on his earthly tabernacle, when he
" saw the ungodly in such prosperity ; " yet had he knowledge
enough, as he " went into the sanctuary of God," and confessed him
self to be " a stranger and pilgrim upon the earth."
It is in the later prophets that the darkness begins to be dispelled
and the ways of God justified to man. Ezekiel is above all others
the teacher of this "new commandment." The familiar words,
" when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness, and doeth
that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive," are the
theme of a great part of this wonderful book. Other prophets have
CONTRASTS OF PHOPHECY. 335
more of poetical beauty, a deeper sense of divine things, a tenderer
feeling of the mercies of God to his people ; none teach so simply
this great moral lesson, to us the first of all lessons. On the eve of the
captivity, and in the midst of it, when the hour of mercy is past, and
no image is too loathsome to describe the iniquities of Israel, still the
prophet does not forget that the Lord will not destroy the righteous
with the wicked : " Though Noah, Daniel, and Job were in the land,
as I live, saith the Lord, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter ;
they shall deliver but their own souls by their righteousness (xiv. 20.).
Yet, behold, therein shall be left a remnant ; and they shall know that
I have not done without cause all that I have done, saith the Lord."
ver. 22.
It is observable that, in the Book of Ezekiel as well as of
Jeremiah, this new principle on which God deals with mankind, is
recognised as a contradiction to the rule by which he had formerly
dealt with them. At the commencement of chap, xviii., as if with
the intention of revoking the words of the second commandment,
" visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children," it is said :
" The word of the Lord came unto me again, saying,
" What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of
Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children s
teeth are set on edge ?
" As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any
more to use this proverb in Israel.
" Behold, all souls are mine ; as the soul of the father, so also the
soul of the son is mine : the soul that sinneth, it shall die."
Similar language occurs also in Jer. xxxi. 29., in a connexion
which makes it still more remarkable, as the new truth is described
as a part of that fuller revelation which God will give of Him
self, when he makes a new covenant with the house of Israel.
And yet the same prophet, as if not at all times conscious of his own
lesson, says also in his prayer to God (Lam. v. 7.), " Our fathers have
sinned and are not. and we have borne their iniquities." The truth
which he felt was not one and the same always, but rather two
336 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
opposite truths, like the Law and the Gospel, which, for a while,
seemed to struggle with one another in the teaching of the prophet
and the heart of man.
And yet this opposition was not necessarily conscious to the pro
phet himself. Isaiah, who saw the whole nation going before to
judgment, did not refrain from preaching the lessons, "If ye be
willing and obedient," and "Let the wicked forsake his way, and the
unrighteous man his thoughts." Ezekiel, the first thought and
spirit of whose prophecies might be described in modern language as
the responsibility of man, like Micaiah in the Book of Kings, seemed
to see the false prophets inspired by Jehovah himself to their own
destruction. As in the prophet, so in the Apostle, there was no sense
that the two lessons were in any degree inconsistent with each other.
It is an age of criticism and philosophy, which, in making the
attempt to conceive the relation of God to the world in a more
abstract way, has invented for itself the perplexity, or, may we
venture to say, by the very fact of acknowledging it, has also found
its solution. The intensity with which the prophet felt the truths
that he revealed, the force with which he uttered them, the desire
with which he yearned after their fulfilment, have passed from the
earth ; but the truths themselves remain an everlasting possession.
We seem to look upon them more calmly, and adjust them more
truly. They no longer break through the world of sight with un
equal power ; they can never again be confused with the accidents
of time and place. The history of the Jewish people has ceased to
be the only tabernacle in which they are enshrined ; they have an
independent existence, and a light and order of their own.
337
CHAP. XII. XVI.
THE last five chapters may be considered as a third section of the
Epistle to the Romans, in which, as in the latter portion of the Ga-
latians, Colossians, Ephesians, Thessalonians, exhortation takes the
place of doctrinal statement, and the imperative mood becomes the
prevailing form of sentence. There is less of plan than in what has
preceded, and more that throws light on the state of the Church. At
first sight, it seems as if the Apostle were dictating to an amanuensis
unconnected precepts, which his experience, not of the Roman con
verts, to whom he was unknown by face, but of the Church and the
world in general, led him to think useful or necessary.
Yet these fragments, including in them ch. xii. 1 xv. 7., at
which point the Apostle returns briefly to his main theme, and con
cludes with a personal narrative, are not wholly deficient in order,
especially that recurring order which was remarked in the intro
duction to the fifth chapter, and which consists in the repetition, at
certain intervals, of a particular subject. The great argument is
now ended ; what follows is its practical application : " For God
concluded all under sin, that he might have mercy upon all ; " the
inference from which is not, " Let us continue in sin that grace may
abound," but rather, " How shall we, who are dead to sin, live any
longer therein ? " which the Apostle expresses once more in language
borrowed from the law : "I beseech you, therefore, brethren, by
the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living sacrifice."
Leaving this thought, he passes on at ver. 3. to another, which
can hardly be said to be connected with it in any other than
that general way in which all the different portions of Christian
VOL. II. Z
338 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
truth or practice are connected with each other, or in which the
part may be always regarded as related to the whole. This new
thought is Christian unity, which is introduced here much in the
same manner as love of the brethren in the Epistle to the Thessa-
lonians. The ground of this unity is humility, each one retiring
into his own duties, that the whole maybe harmonious, remembering
that he is a member of the body of Christ, in which there are
diversities of gifts, which the members of that body are severally
to use. Thence the Apostle goes on to the mention of Christian
graces, apparently unconnected with each other, among which, at
ver. 16., the first thought of humility, which is the true source of
sympathy, reappears, with which peace and forgiveness of injuries
meet in one. At the commencement of chap. xiii. what may be
termed the key-note of this portion of the Epistle returns, the order
of the Church, not now considered in reference to the members of
the same body, but to those that are without the Church the
heathen rulers with whom they came into contact, whom they were
to obey as to the Lord and not to men. The remainder of this
chapter stands in the same relation to the former part as the
latter portion of chap. xii. to the commencement ; that is to say,
it consists of precepts which arise out of the principal subject ; here
honesty in general, out of the duty of paying tribute, which leads,
by a play of words, to the endless debt of love, which is the fulfil
ment of the law ; all which is enforced by the near approach of
the day of the Lord, corresponding to the argument of the preacher
from the shortness of life among ourselves.
The remaining section of the Epistle, from chap. xiv. to xv. 6.,
is taken up with a single subject, the treatment of weak brethren,
who doubt about meats and drinks and the observance of days.
This subject is distinct from what has preceded, and forms a whole
by itself; yet, in the mode of handling it, vestiges of former topics
reappear. It is a counsel of peace, to show consideration to the
doubters ; and for the doubters themselves, it is a proper humility
not to judge others, chap. ii. 1.: and in our conduct towards the
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 339
weak brethren, it must be remembered how awful a thing is the
conscience of sin, which is inseparable from doubt, " for whatever is
not of faith, is sin." And here we come back once more to our
original text, " Be of the same mind one with another."
At this point, the Apostle returns from his digression to the main
subject of the Epistle, which he briefly sums up under the figure of
Jesus Christ a minister of the circumcision to the Gentiles, and
once more clothes in the language of the prophets. Yet a certain
degree of difference is discernible between his treatment of it in this
and in the earlier portions of the Epistle. It is less abstract and
more personal. He seems to think of the truths which he taught
more in connexion with his own labours as Apostle of the Gen
tiles. A similar image to that of Christ the minister of the cir
cumcision he applies to himself, the minister of Christ, the offerer
up of the sacrifice of the Gentiles. Still, Apostle of the Gentiles as
he is, he is careful not to intrude on another man s labours. He has
fulfilled his mission where he is, and does but follow the dictates of
natural feeling in going first to Jerusalem, and then to the Christians
of the West ; for the success of which new mission he desires their
prayers, that it may be acceptable to his friends and without danger
from enemies, and may end in his coming to them with joy.
The last chapter consists almost entirely of salutations. Among
these are interspersed a few of the former topics, some of which
occur also at the end of other Epistles, such as peace and joy at
the success of the Gospel. There are names of servants of God,
among whom are Aquila and Priscilla, and others of whom no re
cord has been elsewhere preserved. One expression raises without
satisfying our curiosity, " distinguished among those who were
Apostles before me." The Epistle, as it began with a summary of
the Gospel, concludes with a thanksgiving in which the subject
of the Epistle is once more interwoven to God the author of the
Gospel, which was once hidden, but now revealed that the Gentile?
also might be obedient to the faith.
z 2
340
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
H. XII.
ovv vpas, dSeX<oi, Sia T&V
Oeov, Trapaa-Trjo-ai ra o-a^ara vpuv Overlap
evdpto-Tov ra> 0e<, rrjv \oyiKr]v \arpeiav
TOV 12
Kal
ayiav
XII. The last chapter ended
with a doxology. All the world
was reconciled to God, and Jew
as well as Gentile included in the
circle of His grace. Therefore
the Apostle did not refrain him
self from uttering a song of tri
umph at the end " of his great
argument." Now he proceeds to
draw the cords of divine love
closer about the hearts and con
sciences of individual men.
At the commencement of the
Epistle we were led to regard
mankind, not as they appeared,
but as they were in the light of
the new revelation. We were
spectators of the human race
looking far and wide on Jew and
Gentile, backwards and forwards
on Adam and Christ. The vic
tory over the law was won ; the
banished Israelite restored to the
favour of God. And now we
return from this wider view 6f
the counsels of Providence to our
selves again. It is the individual
rather than the world, which is
first in the Apostle s thoughts :
" Seeing, then, all these things,
what manner of persons ought
we to be ? " This connexion is
indicated in the word oiKTipptiv,
which refers to ver. 32. of the
preceding chapter : "I exhort
you through the mercies of that
God who has mercy upon Jew
and Gentile alike, who concluded
all under sin that he might have
mercy upon all."
The latter part of the chapter
is remarkable for the irregularity
of its construction and the want
of connexion in its clauses. It
would be a mistaken ingenuity
to invent a system where no sys
tem is intended. Precepts occur
to the Apostle s mind without
any regular sequence, or with
none that we can trace. In some
instances he appears to go off
upon a word, without even re
membering the sense of it. Thus,
in ver. 13. of this chapter, he
passes from ri]v fyiXol-eviav <)iw-
KOVTtQ) to evAoyelre TOVQ $tu)xovra
vpac, which we might have been
disposed to regard as an acci
dental coincidence, were it not
that a nearly similar instance
occurs in ver. 7, 8. of the follow
ing chapter : A-n-odore ovv Trdort
rag dfyeiXac, and prfilt i prj^ey
6(f)ei\re el /u) TO aycnrav a\\i]\ovc 9
K. T. X. Such passages are in
structive, as showing how little
the style of St. Paul can be re
duced to the ordinary laws of
thought and language, how en
tirely we must learn to know him
from himself.
riapcucoXo).] Rather exhort
than beseech, as appears from the
tone of ver. 3. : " But I say
unto you through the grace given
unto me."
our, therefore."] That is, seeing
the mercy of God to Jew and
Gentile alike.
c!ta.j Probably, in its ordinary
sense, to mark the instrument.
The mercies of God are in a
figure the instrument or medium
of the Apostle s exhortation, as in
2 Cor. x. 1.: Avrog de tyw
HavXoc; TrapciKaXw vf
KTU irifiKfag TOV Xi l ~
is not found with verbs
VER. l.J
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
311
12 1 EXHORT* you therefore, brethren, through* the
mercies of God, to* present your bodies a living sacri
fice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your worship*
of swearing ; which leads to the
inference, in this and similar pas
sages, that it is not used as a sign
of adjuration, and necessitates
the translation, though harsh in
English of through."
TrapaffrTJffai, to present,^ has
no sacrificial allusion here, any
more than in other passages in
which it occurs in the New Tes
tament : Rom. vi. 13. 16. 19.;
2 Cor. xi. 2., &c. The idea of
sacrifice is introduced in what
follows.
TCI crw/uiaTa vfiiov^ not "your-
selves," but "your bodies," as
opposed to the mind. Compare
ver. 2.: rrj ayarcurtiurci TOV
VOOQ. In ch. viii. 10. the body
was described as " dead because
of sin," but the spirit " life be
cause of righteousness ; " and in
ver. 23. the believer was said to
be " waiting for the redemption
of the body." Here the image
is different : the body though
offered to God is still alive.
And yet the Apostle would have
us add in the language of Gal.
ii. 20.: "It is not I that live
but Christ liveth in me ; and the
life that I now live in the flesh
I live in faith of the Son of
God."
Svffiav d)<7cn , a living sacri
fice.^ Comp. for a similar play
of words, 1 Cor. xv. 44., crw/^a
ov ; 1 Pet. ii. 5., TTVEV-
// Svaia ; and Aoyiu) Xarpeia
below. The sacrifice is dead, but
the believer is alive, like his
Lord suffering on the cross ; the
image is yet stronger in Gal. ii.
20., "I am crucified with Christ."
The body of the Christian is
called a sacrifice, first, because in
one sense it is dead, as the Apostle
says in the expression just now
quoted ; and, secondly, as it is
wholly dedicated to God. As he
is one with Christ in His cruci
fixion, death, burial, resurrection,
he is also like Him in being a
sacrifice, not because of the sins
of others, but to put an end to
sin in himself, Eph. v. 2.
ayiav evapevrov raj S ew.]] Such
an offering might in a new sense
be termed holy, acceptable, such
as the Levitical law required,
a sacrifice like that of Christ
himself, who was " the lamb
without spot;" 1 Pet. i. 19.
TIJV \oyiKt]v Xarpeiav v/.twi ,
which is your worshipin thought^
in apposition with the preceding
sentence, as in the well-known
classical instance, EXeV/jj/ KTO.-
vwfjiEV McycXc&i XvTrrjv TriKpav : that
is to say, the reasonable service is
not the living sacrifice, but the
offering up of the body as a living
sacrifice. The translation, " rea
sonable service," in the English
version, is not an accurate ex
planation of Aoyu j/Xarjoem, which
is an oxymoron or paradoxical
expression, meaning " an ideal
service, a ceremonial of thought
and mind." The word Xarpeia
signifies a service which con
sists of outward rites, which in
this case is Aoyto), that is, not
outward, but in the mind, the
symbol of a truth, the picture of
an idea. In the Epistle to the
Hebrews the whole Mosaic law
may be said to pass into a XoyiKt)
/ 3
342
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cu. XII.
ai&vi
dXXa
<r#
ai 2 77?
rovrw,
rov *>oos 3 , ets TO Soja/xaea t
TI
\arpela, a law which, from being
ceremonial, became ideal.
Compare the following parallel
passages :
TOVQ TU> 5"6j, 1 Pet. ii. 5. ot ay-
yeXoi 7rpoff(Jjpovffi Kvpiy ooyu/v tv-
\oyiKi)v irtci avaipaKTOV
av, Test. XII. Patriarch.
ch. 3. 6 /uey ov*> rourotc
irw 3"ad)^ etc
aptffrov epeiov eTrt
ro /, Philo de Yictimis, 849.
^ew ju>) ro 7r\i]6o
vu)v eij cii Tiptoe, aAAa 70 K
TCITOV TOV SvOVTOQ TTl EV/JLfl \0yt~
uov, 850. Qui Justus est sacri-
ficium est Dei sancti benedicti,
non vero sic etiam injustus. Syn
opsis Sohar. p. 94.
The words XoytKtj \arpfia and
the use which St. Paul makes in
other places of ceremonial lan
guage (Rom. xv. 8. 16. and else
where), suggest the inquiry, "In
what way the rites arid cere
monies of the Mosaic law became
appropriated to the truths of the
Gospel ? Had the Israelite of old
seen in them anticipations of
Him who was to come ? had any
before the times of the Apostles
made a similar application of
them ? There is no reason to
think that Simeon and Anna, or
any of those who were waiting
for the consolation of Israel, saw
in the ritual of the Temple-wor
ship anything which led their
minds to a knowledge of the
Gospel. Nor is there any indica
tion of a spiritual use of the ce
remonies of the law in other
d v/uwv.
periods of Jewish history. Moses
gave the law without comment
or explanation : its hidden mean
ings were the discoveries of after
ages, to whom the original one
had become unsuited. That
meaning was in the earliest times
inseparable from its use ; not
" allegory, but tautegory," in the
quaint language of Coleridge.
In process of time many meanings
sprang up, but those meanings
were not the fruit of antiquarian
research, such as we find in some
modern works on this subject :
nor were they based on ancient
tradition ; they were fanciful as
sociations of words and things.
The parallel of Philo throws
light on the question we are con
sidering, because it shows how
readily the human mind could
find in the law that which in
reality it brought to the law.
New truths were to be taught ;
new thoughts were to be given ;
and they must be given through
something. The revelation of
the Gospel was not a mere blaze
of light ; it contained objects to
be distinguished, new relations
between God and man to be ex
plained, a scheme of Providence to
be set forth. Some tongue of men
or angels must be the medium of
communion between heaven and
earth. Accordingly, the sacred
things of the Israelites became,
by a sort of natural process, the
figures of the true ; the Old Tes
tament was the mystery of the
New, the New the revelation of
the Old. They were not con
nected by any system of rules ;
VER. 2.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
143
2 in thought. And not to be 1 conformed to this world:
but to be 2 transformed by the renewing of the 3
1 Be ye not.
out of the fulness of the heart
the mouth spoke. The mind
needed not to be taught, but
taught itself the new meaning of
old words. Often the believing
Israelite must have stood by the
altar and seen the priests moving
to and fro in the courts of the
temple, and thought of that other
altar which they had no right to
partake of who served the taber
nacle, and of the priest not after
the order of Aaron, and of the
holy place, that holiest of all, not
yet revealed to his longing eyes.
His attention would no more
dwell, if it had ever done so, with
minute particularity on the de
tails of the ritual ; he might lift
up his heart to the truths which
he associated with it, the cir
cumcision of the heart, the build
ing not made with hands, the
everlasting priesthood, the living
sacrifice. Such may have been
the thoughts of James, the Bishop
of Jerusalem, the Nazarite from
his mother s womb, as described
in the narrative of Hegesippus,
kneeling daily in the temple,
" until his knees became as hard
as a camel s," praying for the
sins of the people.
Yet it must be remarked also,
that the application of the cere
monies of the law to the thoughts
of the Gospel is not so much
an application of what men saw
around them the practice of
Judaism, at that day, as of the
words of Scripture. Thus the
author of the Hebrews argues
almost solely from the descrip
tion of the temple and tabernacle
Be ye.
3 Your.
which he found written. The
words rather than the ceremonies
of the law were the links which
connected the Old and New Tes
tament; and the more entirely
the minds of men became pos
sessed with the new truth, the
slenderer was the thread of asso
ciation by which they were ena
bled to connect them.
2. K CU fj,t) o vo ^r/juar/^eo Oai, and
not to be conformed. ] Dependent
on Trapa/caXw. I exhort you, bre
thren, not to be conformed. Comp.
1 Cor. vii. 31., TO ffia rov KUCT-
[AOV TOVTOV.
TU) aiwi i rovrw, this woTld^\ con
tains an allusion to the Jewish
distinction between b aiuv OVTOQ
and 6 cuuv ip-^operoc^ yue XXwr,
&c., as the times before and the
times after the Messiah ; expres
sions which are continued, for
the most part in the same sense,
in the New Testament, or with
only such a modification of mean
ing as necessarily arises from the
new nature of Messiah s kingdom.
That kingdom was not merely
future ; it was opposed to the
present state which the believer
saw around him, as good to evil,
as the world of those who rejected
Christ to the world of those who
accepted him. This present world
(6 vvv cawy, 2 Tim. i. 10.) was
to the first disciples emphatically
an alwv irovriftoc, (Gal. i. 4.),
which had a god of its own, and
children of its own (2 Cor. iv. 4.),
and was full of invisible powers
fighting against the truth. Hence
it is in a stronger sense than we
speak of the world, which in the
z 4
344
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cii. XII.
rb
TOV Oeov TO ayadov Kal evdpecrTOV Kal
\eyoj yap Sict TT^S x^P LTO<; r ^ 9 SoOeiays poi Travrl TOJ OVTL
eV vp.lv, fJirj vTrepffrpovetv Trap* o Sei <f>povelv, a\\a
$pOVLV, KOLCTTa) O>S 6 #OS ^4plC
KadaTrep yap iv kv\ crw/xa/n, TroXXa xe eoev 4
19 TO
7TL-
language of modern times has be
come a sort of neutral power of
evil, that the Apostle exhorts
his converts not to be conformed
to this world, which is the king
dom, not of God, but of Satan.
Comp. note on Gal. i. 4.
aXXa peraiJiopQovadai, but to be
transformed. } No more reason
can be given why the Apostle
should have changed the word,
than if we were to say, " and not
to be conformed to this world, but
to be transfigured by the renewal
of your minds." (Comp. the
change of t KCUOC into dyaOog in
Rom. v. 7.) The words which
follow, rJj avaxairiocrei TOV rooQ
vjuair, are opposed to the first
verse : " I exhort you to sacrifice
the body ; but renew the mind."
The same opposition occurs in
Eph. iv. 22, 23. : " That ye put
off concerning the former conver
sation the old man, which is cor
rupt according to the deceitful
lusts, and be renewed (avaveovffde)
in the spirit of your minds."
VOVQ is here opposed to body,
as elsewhere to Trrcv/za, 1 Cor.
xiv. 14. Like the English word
" mind," it is a general term, and
includes the will. (Eph. iv. 17.)
It is idle to raise metaphysical
distinctions about words which
the Apostle uses after the fleeting
manner of common conversation,
or to search the index of Aristotle
for illustration of their meaning
which the connexion in which
they occur can alone supply.
Compare note on 1 Thess. v. 23.
eig TO COKina^eiv vpac;, that you
may prove.} ^oKipa^etp signifies,
first, to try, examine; secondly,
to have experience of, know,
approve: "Be so unlike the
world, that the will of God may
be its own witness to you "
"that ye may know by expe
rience what the will of God
working in you is." Yet, in the
words that follow, the " will of
God" is supposed to be active
rather than passive. It is what
God wills, not what we perform,
which is described as the good, the
acceptable (to God), the perfect.
It has been shown in other
places, that such a confusion of
the objective and subjective is
quite in harmony with St. Paul s
style. Those who deny that the
same word can have two different
senses in the same passage, find
no better means of explaining the
words ri TO 6e\rjjj.a TOV SEOV than
by taking them in the sense of
" what God wills you to do, the
thing which is good, acceptable,
and perfect (comp. 1 Thess. iv. 3.,
TOVTO yap EffTi SeXrjfjia TOV Seov o
as a verbal, " respecting
the thing that is good."
The clause tie TO coiiJLaf.iv
vjjiac, has a further connexion, first
with the previous verse through
the repetition of evapenTor, which
recalls the thought of the accept-
VER. 3, 4.]
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
345
mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and accept
able, and perfect will of God. For 1 say, through the
grace given unto me, to every man that is among you,
not to think of himself more highly than he ought to
think; but to think unto* sobriety, according as God
hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. For as
we have many members in one body, and all members
able sacrifice, and also with ver.
34. of the former chapter, " Who
hath known the mind of God ? "
which is referred to here in
the words, "Be ye renewed in
the spirit of your minds, that ye
may have practical experience of
what the mind of God is." Com
pare 1 Cor. ii. 11. 16., for a si
milar transition of thought from
the incomprehensibility of the
Divine nature to the knowledge
of it.
3. For I say, though not of
myself, but by the grace given
unto me (comp. the still more
pointed expressions, 1 Cor. vii.
25., yj Mprjf c> tu>jui wf r)\erjfA-
VOQ VTTO Kvpiov TTKTTOQ ti/cu), to
every one that is among you, "if
there be any who seems to be
somewhat," not to think of him
self too much, beyond what he
ought, but to have thoughts of
himself only with the view of
thinking soberly of himself, ac
cording as God has given to each
one a measure of faith or spiritual
capacity.
yap, for. ] Why "for"? One
of the greatest moral impediments
to this renewal is spiritual pride,
the desire to appropriate in an es
pecial sense to self, the grace com
mon to all believers. Hence the
Apostle argues from the part to
the whole : " I exhort you to be
transfigured ; for I tell you as a
part of this that ye must be hum
ble." Comp. UTroKttAvTrrerat
in Rom. i. 17. In both passages
the Apostle uses yap rather from
an instinct of the connexion than
an express consciousness of it.
Qpovelv etg ro o-w0pove7i , to think
unto sobriety.] " To let modera
tion in thought be the limit or
end of your thought," or as the
paronomasia may be turned
rather more loosely, to be minded
to be of a sound mind. Comp.
2 Cor. x. 13. : OVK etc ra a^erpa
KCI v^?](T 6 jjLeQa, a A Act /caret ro
TOV tcavorof, ov k^iptrrev
pirpov. Eph. iv. 7.
ptrpov TT/orewc, the measure of
faith. ] All things are done by
faith ; but faith itself is given
in different proportions to dif
ferent men. As in temporal
things we say, " do not be strain
ing after things beyond your
power," so St. Paul says, "be
not ambitious after things beyond
your spiritual power, and remem
ber that this too is not your
own, but given you by God."
Even " the stature of the perfect
man," who is the image of the
Church (Eph. iv. 13. ), is not
without measure.
4. The connexion of this
verse with what has preceded is
as follows. Let us not be high-
minded, but all keep our proper
place, according to the measure
which God has given us. For
we are like the body, in which
316
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. XII.
ra Se /xe X?? iravra ov r^v avrty e^ec
TroXXoi eV crw/xa ecr^e^ eV ^jpicrr^, TO Se Kad*
e^o^reg Se ^apLcr/xara /cara TT)J> yapiv
ovrws o 5
els 1
etre
8o0elo m av 6
Kara rrjv ava\oyiav rrjs
there are many members with
different offices. Compare 1 Cor.
xii. 14.31., also Phil. ii. 3, 4.: "Let
nothing be done through strife or
vainglory, but in lowliness of mind
let each esteem other better than
themselves. Look not every man
on his own things, but every man
also on the things of others."
Where there is the same con
nexion between thinking of others
and not thinking of ourselves, a
connexion which we may trace
in our own lives and characters
as well as in the words of Scrip
ture. For " egotism " is the
element secretly working in the
world, which is the most hostile
to the union of men with one
another, which destroys friendly
and Christian relations.
5. Where the Church is spoken
of as a body, three modes of ex
pression may be noted. It is the
body of which Christ is the head,
as in Col. ii. 19. ; or simply the
body of Christ, as in 1 Cor. xii.
27., Eph. iv. 12. (comp. Eph. i.
22, 23., where both points of view
are united, the church, of which
He is the head, being also spoken
of as " His body, the fulness of
Him which filleth all in all ") ; or,
lastly, we are one body in Christ,
in the same sense that as Chris
tians we are all things in Christ.
TO ce Katf t, and in what
concerns each."] TO /oifl tie quod
attinet ad singulos, Mark, xiv.
19. The form TO KU& tic rarely
if ever occurs elsewhere even in
Hellenistic Greek; it is, however,
the reading of the principal manu
scripts, and is supported by the
analogy of TO Kad fiplpav, TO Kara
(frvffiv, &c., the use of the nomina
tive having probably arisen out
of a confusion of the other for
mula, IQ KClO IQ.
The general meaning of the
verse is as follows : For as the
body has many members, which
have each of them distinct offices,
so we, being many, are one body
in Christ, diverse and one too,
interdependent members of each
other. Compare 1 Cor. xii. 27,
28., Eph. iv. 1116., where the
same thought is still more fully
worked out with a similar refer
ence to the different offices and
gifts of the Church.
An organised being has been
described, in the language of me
taphysical writers, as a being in
which every means is an end,
and every end is a means, or in
which the whole is prior to the
part. The Apostle has another
form of speech of a very different
kind, but not less expressive of
close and intimate union : " We
are baptized into one body ; we
are drunk of one spirit."
6. s.^oi Tg ^e xcijO/Vyuara. But
having gifts. ~] These words are
sometimes joined with what pre
cedes, " We are one body in Christ,
and individually interdependent
members, howbeit, with divers
gifts." In this way, however,
the long sentence, which must be
VER. 5 7.J
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
347
5 have not the same office : so we, being many, are one
body in Christ, and every one members one of another.
6 But* as we have gifts differing according to the grace
that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy
7 according to the proportion of faith ; or ministry, let*
continued to the end of ver. 18.,
greatly drags, and the hortatory-
tone of the first part of the
chapter is dropped, and only re
sumed again at ver. 18. Further,
the opposition implied by e to
the tv aUjfjia f.ffp.ev iv ^piarw, is
already anticipated in the clause,
ro t)e xaO e tQ.
A better way of explaining the
passage is, to oppose lypvTtQ e
to the previous exhortation in
ver. 3. "Let us not be high-
ininded, for we are the members
of one body ; but as we have
different gifts, let us seek to use
them according to the measure
of grace and faith which we
have." The words, tyovreg U x-
piffpara, carry on the thought of
ver. 3. The imperative which is
required in what follows may
also be supplied from ver. 3., the
recollection of which is recalled
at ver. 6. in the words, KCITO. r//v
avakoyiav TTJG iri ore we, which an
swer to the clause, eK-aorw we o
vtoc impure fjLerpov TT/OTCWC. "But,
as we have diverse gifts, accord
ing to the grace given unto us,
it may be prophecy, let us have
it according to the proportion of
faith, or the gift of ministering,
let us have it for use in the mi
nistry ; or, if a man be a teacher,
let him use his gift in teaching ;
or an exhorter, let him use his
gift in exhortations." That is to
say, " We have divers gifts, let
us have them, not beyond, but
within measure, to be used not
to exalt ourselves, but in that
whereunto they are appointed."
Philosophy, as well as religion,
Plato and Aristotle, as well as
St. Paul, speak of " a measure in
all things ; of one in many, and
many in one ; " of " not going be
yond another ; " of <^po ?<ne and
ffMfppoarvi r) ; of a society of another
kind, " fitly joined together," in
which there are divers orders,
and no man is to call anything
his own, and all are one. As the
shadow to the substance, as words
to things, as the idea to the
spirit, so is that form of a state
of which philosophy speaks, to
the communion of the body of
Christ.
The construction is twice va
ried. Instead of saying, tire
ri]v avaXoyi aj/ TTJG Tr/arcwe, the
Apostle adds in the second clause,
kv rfi SiaKoviy (which indirectly
implies the same thought " let
him confine himself to his office "),
and further changes the person
in the words 6 t^aca-wr. For a
parallel omission of the verb,
compare 1 Pet. iv. 11., ei ne
AaAei we Aoyia Qeov, ei TIQ BiaKOJ tl
a>C EL, iayvoc ?/e ^opryyet 6 OeoQ : also
2 Cor. viii. 13.
TTjoo^rem? , prophecy.^ The
gift of prophecy, common to the
new, as well as to the old dispen
sation ; not simply teaching or
preaching, but the gift of extra
ordinary men in an extraordinary
348
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. XII.
, LT SLOLKOVICLV, iv rfj SiaKovia, etre 6 SiSacnccoz , 7
iv rfj StSao-KaXia eire 6 TrapOLKaXuv, iv rfj 7rapaK\TJo-i, 6 8
jueraSiSovs iv airXoTrjTi, 6 Trpoi crra/zej os iv (TTTovSfj, 6
eXea)j> iv tXapdr^n. 07 ayaTrrj avvrroKpiro^ aTrocrTvyovvTes 9
TO Trovrjpov, KO\\a)fJLPOi TO) ayaOa), rfj (j)i\aSe\<f)La, ecs 10
, rfj
age. It was the gift of the Apo
stles and their converts, more
than any other characteristic of
the first beginnings of the G-os-
pel, the utterance of the Spirit in
the awakened soul, the influence
and communion of which was
caught by others from him who
uttered it; not an intellectual gift,
but rather one in which the in
tellectual faculties were absorbed,
yet subject to the prophets, higher
and more edifying than tongues,
failing and transient in compa
rison with love (1 Cor. xii., xiii.,
xiv.). Compare note.
Kara rj}vava\oylav rijQ TT/OTCWC.]
Let him have it according to that
proportion of faith which makes
a man a prophet ; i. e. let him
prophesy as he has faith for it ;
or, let him prophesy in propor
tion to the degree of his faith.
7. %Lo.Koviav may (1.) either
relate to the general duty of a mi
nister of Christ ; just as TT LCTTLQ
occurs in 1 Cor. xii. among spe
cial gifts ; it is not necessary here
any more than there, or in Eph.
iv. 11, 12., that the meaning of
each word should be precisely
distinguished : or (2.) may refer
to the office of a deacon in its
narrower sense, of which we
know nothing, and cannot be cer
tain even that it was confined to
the object of its first appointment
mentioned in Acts, vi. 1., viz.,
the care of the poor, and the ad
ministration of the goods of the
Church, kv 7-77 SiaKovig,. Com
pare 1 Tim. iv. 15., kv TOVTOIQ
o tcw) . The teacher or
preacher, as distinct from the
prophet.
8. 7rapa.K\rj(nG is distinguished,
as sympathy and exhortation,
from instruction (3t^a^//).
Comp. 1 Cor. xii. 4., SiaiptffeiQ
$E ^apioyicirwj ettrtV, TO $e avro
7rvevfj,a, and Eph. iv. 11, 12., /cat
CIVTOQ f.lii)KV TOVQ p.EV UTTOffToXoVQ,
TOVQ ^ 7rpo0//rac5 roue f vayy-
Atorac, TOVQ fie Trot/ieVae Kai didaff-
our, TrpOQ TOV Ka-apTiffpov riUj
/an , elg tpyov Stauov/ag, etc ot/co
TOV -
v aTror^rt. Not, liberally,
but, in singleness of heart, " as
unto the Lord, and not unto
men," with no other thought than
that of pure love.
Not the pa
tron of strangers, but the ruler
of the Church, or any one who
bears authority over others. Com
pare 1 Thess. v. 12.
eV O-TTOU^J/.] In the spirit of
those who do whatsoever their
hand finds to do with all their
might.
iv tXaporj/ri, he that
showeth mercy, with cheerful
ness.^ Let a man find pleasure in
doing good to the unfortunate.
There should be a contrast be
tween the cheerfulness of his de
portment and the sadness of his
errand.
VER. 810.]
EPISTLE TO TPIE ROMANS.
349
us use our gift in ministering: or he that teacheth, in
8 teaching ; or he that exhorteth, in exhortation : he that
giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth,
with diligence ; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerful-
9 ness. Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that
10 which is evil ; cleave to that which is good. Be kindly
affectioned one to another in* the love of the brethren ;
on.
All these exhortations may be
summed up in the general pre
cept which follows :
9. )/ ayri7r/7 uvvTroKpiroQ.^ Let
love be real, and not merely put
The words which follow
TO Trovr/poi , /coXXoi-
r<*> aya0, are in no con
struction. It has been proposed
to connect them with ayctTrd-e a\-
\TI\OVL, understood in >/ uymr /
awrroKpiToc. But while the gram
mar is not much helped, the sense
is greatly injured by this mode
of taking them. As they are
unconnected in construction, it
is better to disconnect them in
meaning, and take the several
clauses as so many detached pre
cepts, dictated by the Apostle
to an amanuensis, perhaps with
many pauses, as they occurred to
him.
It may be questioned whether
these words are an imperative or
an indicative. In point of sense
the indicative is equally good,
and the omission of the indicative
verb eari much more common
than of the imperative ; but in
this passage, as imperatives pre
cede and follow, it might be
argued that the imperative sense
is more naturally continued.
Yet the imperative sense can
hardly be continued through all
three verses. The truth seems
to be, that the Apostle, who had
never distinctly expressed the
imperative mood, has here lost
sight of it altogether, and passed
from exhortation to description.
Nor is there much difference be
tween them. For every descrip
tion of the Christian character
is also an exhortation to Chris
tians.
10. rrj ^tXadeX^m.] Not, as in
the English version, with brother
ly love, but (as in 1 Thess. iv. 9.)
" in your love to the brethren,
affectionate one toward another."
^tXooTopyot, as of parents to chil
dren or of children to parents.
rrj Ttjj.rj ciXX//Xov TTjOor/you^tevot.]]
Not, in honour preferring one
another (as in Phil. ii. 3., rr\ ra-
Tren ofypoffvi r] a\\ri\ovQ fiyovpevot
vTrepiyoi TdQ eavrwv), in defence of
which something may be urged
on the ground of the Apostle
having made an etymological
adaptation of the word (cf. Trpoe-
ypa^j/, Gal. iii. 1.), and the rarity,
if it is ever found, of the construc
tion with the accusative case
but as Theophylact and some of
the ancient versions, " going be
fore or anticipating one another
in paying honour : " " leading the
way to one another," like TrpoTro-
joevojLievo*," and the Latin " an-
teire."
r/7 O-TTOV^ ju>) oKvrjpoi.^\ Not
wanting in the energy of action.
TW 7ri v/j.ari ^iovTEQ, fervent in
spirit j~\ opposed to what preceded,
as the inward to the outward:
350
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. XII.
rfj <T7rov8fj JUT) oKvypoi, rw Tr^ev/xari ^eoz^re?, ra> Kvpio> 1 n
SotAeuoz Tes, Ty eXTTiSi yaipovres, rfj $Xu//ei VTro^tvovrts, 12
rfj 7rpo<TV)(fj npo&KapttpovvTes, rcus ^peiats TOJJ> ajyluv 13
/co (j wj o wres, TT)I> <$)L\oi;VLav 8iO)KovTS. euXoyeire roug u
StcoKoz Tas u/ms euXoyetre, /ecu JU,T) Karapacrde. yoLipew is
/xera yaipovTW^, K\aieiv jnera fcXatdz^rco^. TO avro et? 16
dXX??Xovs tfipovovvTts, fJirj ra vi/n^Xa $povovvT.<$, ctXXa rois
1 Katpy.
" energetic in act, fervent in
soul."
rw Kvpik) BouXevovrfc? serving
the Lord.~\ Considerable weight
of MS. authority attaches to
the reading /ocupw <WXetotTe (A.
G.y! p .) ; either, " adapting your
selves to the necessities of the
time," which comes in strangely
among precepts to simplicity
and zeal, though, if a good mean
ing be put upon the words, not
unlike the spirit of the Apostle in
other places, Acts, xvi. 3, 1 Cor.
ix. 20. ; or (2.) in a higher sense,
"serving the time;" because the
time is short, and the day of the
Lord is at hand : an interpreta
tion which, like the former one,
connects better with what follows,
than with what precedes. Later
editors, however, agree with the
Textus Receptus in reading rw
Kvpio) fiovXevovrec, which, on the
whole, has the greater weight of
external evidence (A. B. v.) in
its favour. Nor can any ob
jection be urged on internal
grounds, except that of an ap
parent want of point, the slight
est of all objections to a read
ing or interpretation in the writ
ings of St. Paul. And even this
is really groundless, if we regard
St. Paul as summing up in these
words what had gone before:
" Be diligent, zealous, doing
2 Add Kal.
all things unto the Lord, and not
unto men. Remembering in all
things that you are the servants
of Christ." The difficulty is, in
any case, no greater than that
a ^upLffpa Tri(TT(t)Q should occur
among other special graces in
Cor. xii., or that the word S eo-
orvyele should be found in a long
catalogue of particular sins.
Rom. i. 30.
12. rrj e\7ri%i ^aipovT^.~\ With
joy in time of hope and prosperity,
with patience in time of affliction.
r/7 A/4/t might be a dative after
vtrojjiEvovrec, "constant to afflic
tion," but is probably an ablative
" constant in affliction ; " the
construction of the previous
clause being continued.
13. TCUQ ^peiciiQ T(JJV dyiwv Koivk)-
rovvTec.~] Not, having a portion in
the needs of the saints ; but, im
parting to the saints who have
need. Compare Acts, xx. 34.,
Gal. vi. 6., Rom. xv. 20. The
variation in the text, rale ^E LULQ
T>V a.yii)v /coivwvoi/rrec, A. a. f. g.,
holding communion with the me
mories of the saints, is a curious
instance of a reading supported
by ancient authorities, in which
ideas of the fourth or fifth century
are transferred to the first.
TI}V fyiko&v iav liwKovrtQ. In
the same strain as in the pre
ceding clause, the Apostle con-
VER. 1116.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
351
11 in honour leading* the way one to another; not back-
12 ward in diligence; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord;
13 rejoicing in hope ; patient in tribulation ; continuing
instant in prayer; distributing to the necessity of
14 saints; given to hospitality. Bless them which perse-
15 cute you : bless, and curse not. Rejoice with them
is that do rejoice *, weep with them that weep. Be of
the same mind one toward another : minding* not
Add and.
tinues : " Relieving the wants
of the saints, and given to re
ceiving them hospitably." The
connexion leads us to suppose
that the Apostle is speaking of
hospitality specially to Christians,
perhaps pilgrims at Rome, and
not to men in general.
14. fi/XoycTre TOVQ ^uaKovrag
7/ftcic, bless them that persecute
you^\ remind us of our Lord s
words recorded in Matt. v. 44. :
" Bless them that curse you."
The similarity is, however, not
close enough to be urged as
a proof that St. Paul was ac
quainted with our Gospels. The
word SKJJKOVTQ in the preceding
verse, appears to have suggested
the thought which the Apostle,
as his manner is, expresses first
positively and then negatively.
15. It is proposed by some in
terpreters to connect KXaieiv /uera
K\cu6vTb)v with the preceding
verse, so as to give the following
sense : " Bless them that per
secute you : bless and curse not,
so that ye may be able to sym
pathise with all their good and
ill fortune, thinking of one an
other with like thoughts." This
is another instance of the sacri
fice of sense to an attempt at
grammar and connexion. To
say : "Bless your enemies, that
you may weep with them that
weep," is extremely far-fetched.
The infinitive is better taken
for the imperative, as in Phil,
iii. 16., Luk. ix. 3., that is to say,
the construction is changed, and
the sentence proceeds as if Xe yw
TrapaKaXw, or a similar word, had
gone before.
16. TO avro.] Either with EIQ
a\\i]\ovc, (1.) Thinking of your
selves as you would have others
think of you the reverse of
placing yourselves above one
another (jri) TCI v\^/r)\a typorovvre^ ;
or with <f>pove~iv preserving the
ordinary sense of TO O.VTO (f)poveHi
in other passages (cf. TO av-b
typore.~iv ) aXX//Xote). (2.) " Be
of the same mind one with ano
ther," a counsel not of humility,
but of unity, of which humility
is also a part. Compare ver. 4.
OlXXa To"lQ TCLTTtlVOiQ CfWCLTTayO-
ju o.] It is doubted whether in
this passage rciTreivoTe is neuter
or masculine: the word vv/^Xa,
which precedes, would incline
us to suppose the former ; the
common use of Tcnreivog is in
favour of the latter. Let us
suppose the first, and take
TCITTEIVOQ in the sense in which it
is most opposed to ui^/Xoe, not
"miserable," as in James, i. 10,
but "lowly." Then, amid pre
cepts of sympathy and humility,
or unity, the Apostle may be
352
EPISTLE TO THE KOMANS.
[On. XII.
raireivos crvvaTrayo^voi.
KaKov avri KGLKOV a/Tro
yivea-Ot (fipovipoi Trap* eav-
SiSoVres, Trpovoovpevoi 17
a [ivomiov TOV Oeov KOL I ~\ IV&TTIOV rojv 2 avOpatTTW d 18
Svvarov, TO ef vfjiojv jaera TrdvTOJV avOpojirav elprjvevovres,
fjir) eavrovs K?>iKOvvT<$, ayaTTrjTOi, dXXa Sore TOTTOV rfj 19
yey/ a7rr(U yap Epol e/cSt/c^crt?, ey^ d
1 Om. eV&)7r. . . feat.
supposed to proceed as follows :
" Thinking of yourselves as on a
level with one another, minding
not high things, not struggling
against lowly ones ; " or with
rdTmrote as a masculine, " Mind
ing not high things, but de
scending to be with the lowly."
The two opposed clauses thus
serve as a new expression of the
general thought, TO av-6 elc aXX?/-
\OVQ <j)povovvTG, which is again
resumed in ver. 17.: "Be on a
level; there are v^rjXd and
Tcnreiva or TCLTTEIVOI ; do not seek
to rise to one, or strive against
descending to the other." So far
all is clear. The difficulty is how
to insert the notion of "force"
or " constraint " which is con
tained in the word avrairayonevoi.
It may possibly be nothing more
than the misuse or exaggeration
in the use of a word which arises
from an imperfect command over
language ; but it may also be
fairly explained as referring to
the struggle in our own minds,
or the violence we do to our own
feelings. The Apostle might
have said role rairtivoiQ ffvrojjii-
or aw TOIQ TCLTTEIVOLQ
Remembering that
the human heart is apt to be in
rebellion against lessons of hu
mility, he uses, not with perfect
clearness, the more precise word
JJLYI ylvtaQt. ^pot ipot Trap
be not wise in your own opinions. ~\
These words are a short summary
of what has preceded ; they have
also a reference to what follows.
As above the Apostle connected
lowly thoughts of ourselves with
consideration of others, so pride
leads in its train retaliation ; it
will not hear of the Gospel pre
cept, " If any man smite you on
the right cheek, turn to him the
other also."
Trpovoovjjievoi KaAo.] It is a
favourite thought of the Apostle
that the believer should walk
seemly to those that are without,
careful of the sight of man no
less than of God. Comp. 2 Cor.
viii. 21., where, speaking of the
collection to be made for the
poor saints, the Apostle says that
he had one chosen to go up with
him to Jerusalem with the alms :
yap /cact ov JJLOVOV
oVf aXXa fjai kvuniov
as in this passage.
Cf. Prov. iii. 4., fccu Trporoov KaXa
ivwiTiov Kvpiov /ecu avdpwTrwr.
18. 1 ^VVCLTOV) TO l VyUfe)) .] If
it be possible, live peaceably with
all men. To which the Apostle
adds, as a limitation, TO ! vp<Zv :
if other men will not, yet, as far
as you are concerned, live peace
ably ; at any rate, it is possible
for you.
19. ore TOTTOV TTJ dpyfj, give
VER. 17 19.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
353
high things, but going along* with the lowly. Be not
17 wise in your own conceits. Recompense to no man
evil for evil. Provide things honest 1 [in the sight of
18 God and] in the sight of 2 men. If it be possible, as
much as lieth in you, be* at peace with all men.
19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give
place unto wrath : for it is written, Vengeance is mine;
Om. in the sight of God and.
2 Add all.
place to wrath. ] These words
have received three explanations :
(1.) Make room for the wrath
of your enemy, i. e. let the wrath
of your enemy have its way ; or,
(2.) Make room for your anger
to cool, " date spatium irae," give
your anger a respite; or, (3.)
Make way for the wrath of God.
The second of these explanations
is equally indefensible on grounds
of language and sense. It is only
as a translation of a Latinism we
can suppose the phrase to have
any meaning at all, and the
meaning thus obtained, " defer
your wrath," is poor and weak.
According to the first and third
explanations the words t)or TOKOV
are taken in the same sense
(which also occurs in Eph. iv. 27.
jjirj^/e ?>i$ore TOTTOV rw oia^oAw),
the doubt being whether the word
opyfj refers to the wrath of our
enemy or of God. The latter is
supposed to be required by the
context, " Give place to the wrath
of God, who has said, Vengeance
is mine." The last clause, how
ever, may be equally well con
nected with the words, avenge
not yourself; nor is it easy to
conceive that if the Apostle had
intended the wrath of God, he
would have expressed himself so
concisely and obscurely as in the
words rrj dpyrj. The first ex-
VOL. II. A
planation is, therefore, the true
one. " Dearly beloved, avenge
not yourself, but let your enemy
have his way." It has been ob
jected that common prudence
requires that we should defend
ourselves against our enemies.
This is true, and yet the fact,
that the same objection ap
plies equally to the words of
our Saviour in the Gospel
(Matt. v. 34 48.), is a sufficient
answer ; 6 ^v^aperog
yap.] The words
that follow are from Deut. xxxii.
35. The spirit in which they are
cited by the Apostle, is somewhat
different from that in which they
occur in the Old Testament; not,
"avenge not yourself, for God
will avenge you, and so your
enemy will not escape free ;" but,
" avenge not yourself, because
you are intruding on the office
and province of God."
The principle here laid down
may be sometimes a counsel of
perfection ; that is to say, a prin
ciple which, in the mixed state of
human things, it is impossible to
carry out in practice. But it is
worthy of remark that it is also a
maxim acted upon by civilised
nations in the infliction of penal
ties for crime. There is no vin-
dictiveness in punishment, neither
A
354
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. XII.
Xeyei Kvpios. dXXa Ea^ 1 irtiva 6 e^^os crov,
avrov lav Su//a, Tronic avrov. TOVTO yap TTOLWV a
iTvpos crct)pevo L<5 771 TT]v K<pa\r)v avrov. fjirj VLKOJ vrro rov
/ca/cov, dXXa vUa Iv r& ayaOa) TO Kaxov.
1 Om d\Aa: add ovv after l&v.
retaliation for the injury done to
the individual nor to the state,
nor, if so be, for the impiety
against God. The preservation
of society is its only object.
Human law begins by acknow
ledging that God alone is the
judge ; it is not even the execu
tioner of his anger against sin,
much less of man s wrath against
his fellows. Conscious of its own
impotence and of the awful re
sponsibilities which surround it,
it only seeks to accomplish, in a
superficial and external manner,
what is barely necessary for self-
defence.
[ecu- ovv. If ovv were genuine,
this and the preceding verse
might be connected as follows :
Therefore seeing you have no
right to avenge yourself, do good
only to your enemy. There is no
need, however, to invent a con
nexion in a passage the general
character of which is so abrupt,
more especially as the particle
ovv is probably spurious.]
The words which follow, TOVTO
yap TTOtwv a.vQoa.Kaq TTVQOQ
creig eirl TYJV ice^aX^v avrov, " for
in so doing thou shalt heap
coals of fire upon his head," are
a well-known difficulty. It must
not be overlooked that they are
a quotation from Prov. xxv. 21.,
taken verbatim from the LXX.,
which, however, has an addi
tional Clause, O ^ KVplOQ aVTCUTO-
dwerfi croi ctyaOd. The meaning
of the words, in their original
connexion, has been thus given :
" Do good to your enemies, for
so you shall undo them with grief
and indignation at themselves,
but God shall reward you." To
this it may be objected that the
adversative particle e)e (6 e KV-
piog) has no force, and also that
the expression, " thou shalt heap
coals of fire on his head," is an
image of destruction, and cannot
be distorted into the metaphor of
destroying another with grief and
indignation.
But, secondly, the context in
the New Testament in which the
expression occurs, has reference
to the forgiveness of injuries, and
in some way or other a meaning
VER. 20, 21.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
355
20 I will repay, saith the Lord. Rather " if 1 thine enemy
hunger, feed him ; if he thirst, give him drink : for it* is
21 by doing this that thou shalt heap coals of fire on his
head." Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with
good.
1 Therefore.
must be found for the words,
"thou shalt heap coals of fire
upon his head," which is in ac
cordance with this precept. The
explanation, "thou shalt melt
thine enemy like wax," may be
at once set aside as inconsistent
with the words. Nor is the other
interpretation, " thou shalt make
his soul burn with remorse," really
more defensible. What appro
priateness is there in the expres
sion, " heaping coals of fire on the
head," to express inward remorse
and indignation ? or how would
the desire even to excite remorse
in an enemy be consistent with
Christian forgiveness ? It is im
possible to harmonise such an in
terpretation with what precedes
or follows. Better, therefore, to
take the words in their literal
sense as an image of destruction,
which is, however, ironically ap
plied by the Apostle, in the spirit
of the New Testament, rather
than of the Old, so as to reverse
the meaning. " Instead of aveng
ing yourselves, say rather (with
them of old time), if thine enemy
hunger, feed him ; if he thirst,
give him drink, for this is the
right way of undoing and de
stroying him ; this is the true
mode of retaliation ; this is the
Christian s revenge." There is an
emphasis on TOVTO : " In so doing
thou shalt inflict on him the true
vengeance." The omission of the
final words (but the Lord shall re
ward thee), which would be in
appropriate, if the first part of
the passage is to have this turn
given to it, is a strong argument
that the suggested interpretation
is the correct one.
2 1 . The explanation j ust given
is further confirmed by the verse
which follows. He has just said,
" Destroy your enemy with deeds
of mercy." Following out the
same thought he adds, "Do not
be carried away by his evil, but
carry him away by your good."
A A 2
3-56 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
CHAR XIII.
Is the previous chapter the Apostle had spoken of the unity of the
Church, and of the offices of its members. He had gone on to scatter
admonitions, following each other in order sometimes of sound, .some
times of meaning, which, like the precepts of the sermon on the Mount,
went beyond the maxims of heathen virtue, or the sayings of " thorn
of old time." Men were to think humbly of th< . to return
good for evil, to feed their enemies, to live peaceably with all. Con
tinuing in the same spirit, he adds, " they are to be obedient to the
powers that be." This is a part of the Christian s duty, which he will
more easily fulfil if he regards the magistrate as he truly is, as " the
minister of God for good."
The ear with which St. Paul dwells upon his theme, as
well as the allusions to the same subject in other p j i of the
ament (Tit. iii. 1., 1 Pet. ii. 13 18.), are proof s that he
is guarding against a tendency to which he knew the first believers
to be subject. He is speaking to the Christians at Rome, as a bishop
of the fourth or fifth century might have addressed the multitudes
of Alexandria ; preaching counsels of moderation to " the fifth
monarchy men " of that day. They were more in the eye of the
Christian world than believers elsewhere, more likely to come into
conflict with the imperial power, perhaps in greater danger of being
led away with the dream of another kingdom. The spirit of rebel
lion, against which the Apostle is warning them, was not a mere
misconception of the teaching of the Go-pel ; it lay deep in the cir
cumstances of the age and in the temper of the Jewish people. It
ig irnpob.ible to forget, however blight may be their historical ground-
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 357
work, the well-known words of Suetonius. Claud, c. 25.. " Judzeos
impulsore Chresto assidue turuultuantes Koma expulit." (Acts, xviii.
2.) The narrative of Scripture itself affords indications of similar
agitations, so tar as they can be expected to cross the peaceful path
of our Saviour and his disciples. The words of the prophecy, as it is
termed, of Caiaphas respecting our Lord, however unfounded, imply
a political fear more than a religious enmity. The question of the
Pharisees, " Is it lawful to give tribute to Civsar.* and the argument
with which the Jews wrought on the fears of Pilate, are also not with
out significance. The account of Judas the Gaulonite. in Josephus,
-who rose up about the time of the taxing," and whom Josephus terms
4 the founder of the fourth philosophy of the Jews." Ant. xviii. c. 1.
1. 6., is a more explicit evidence of the spirit of insubordination.
That "philosophy" consisted in an inviolable attachment to liberty,
and " in calling no man Lord " but God himself ( 6.), a principle
which was maintained by its adherents with indescribable constancy.
The author of the movement was no ordinary man. and the move
ment itself so tar from being a transient one. that it continued through
century, and is regarded by Josephus. as " laying the
foundation of the miseries" of the Jewish war. i^xvii. c. 1. 1.)
The account of Josephus himself, unwilling as he is to do them
justice, shows that in their first commencement the Zealots 1
animated by noble thoughts, their testimony to which t".
ready to seal by tortures and death. Many of fl*eae "Gftlflei l"
^for in this country they were chiefly found^ were probably among
the first converts. Like the Essenes. they stood in some relation
that we are unable to trace to the followers of John the Baptist and
brisi We cannot suppose that in all cases the temper of the
Zealot had died away in the bosom of the Christian. A very slight
misunderstanding of the manner in which " the kingdom was to be
restored to Israel" might sutnce to rekindle the flame. If our Lord
himself had said. Peace I leave with you, He had also said. I come
not to bring peace on earth, but a sword : if lie had commanded
Peter to put up his sword into the sheath. He had also commanded
A v
358 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
them each to sell his garment and buy one ; if He had paid tribute, He
had also declared that the children of the kingdom were free from the
tribute. We could hardly wonder if those who heard His words some
times mistook the result for the object, or confused the Jewish belief of
the kingdom of heaven upon earth with the kingdom of God that is
within. The after history of the Church teaches how near such a
confusion lay to the truth itself. Not once only, nor during our
Lord s lifetime only, there have been those who have " taken him by
force to make him a king."
The words " the powers that be are ordained of God " have been
made the foundation of many doctrines of passive obedience and
non-resistance. Out of the Apostle s " counsels of moderation " have
developed themselves the Divine right of government, however exer
cised and under all circumstances, and even of particular forms of
government. The party feelings of an age have been clothed in the
language of Scripture, and established on the ground of antiquity.
If the first Christians were to obey the heathen emperors, how
can we ever be justified in shaking off the yoke of a Christian
sovereign ? If St. Paul said this under Nero, how much more is it
true of the subjects of King Charles I. ?
Such arguments are two-edged ; for as many passages may be
quoted from Scripture which indirectly tend to the subversion, as can
be adduced for the maintenance, of order or of property. The words
of the psalmist, " to bind their kings in chains, their nobles in fetters
of iron," are in the mouth of one class ; " shall I lift up my hand
to slay the Lord s anointed ? " of another ; and in peace and pro
sperity men turn to the one, in the hour of revolution to the other.
Many are the texts which we either silently drop or insensibly
modify, with which the spirit of modern society seems almost
unavoidably to be at variance. The blessing on the poor, and the
" hard sayings " respecting rich men, are not absolutely in accordance
even with the better mind of the present age. We cannot follow the
simple precept, " Swear not at all," without making an exception
for the custom of our courts of law. We dare not quote the words,
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 359
" Go sell all thou hast and give to the poor," without adding the
caution, " Beware, lest in making the copy thou break the pattern."
We are riot so often exhorted " to obey God rather than man," as
warned against the misapplication of the words.
These instances are sufficient to teach us how moderate we should
be in reasoning from particular precepts, even where they agree with
our preconceived opinions. The truth seems to be that the Scripture
lays down no rule applicable to individual cases, or separable from the
circumstances under which it is given. Still less does it furnish a poli
tical or philosophical system "My kingdom is not of this world,"
which it scarcely seems to touch. No one can infer from the passage
that we are considering that St. Paul believed it wrong to rise against
wicked rulers in any case, because they were the appointment of God,
anymore than from his speaking of wrestling against principalities and
powers we can conclude that he supposed, with some of the Ebionitish
sects, that all power was of the devil. It never occurred to him that the
hidden life which he thought of only as to be absorbed in the glory of
the sons of God, was one day to be the governing principle of the civi
lised world. Though " he has written this in an epistle," he would
not have us use it " altogether " without regard to the state of this
world. Only in reference to the time at which he is writing, looking
at the infant community in relation to the heathen world, he exhorts
them to suffer rather than oppose ; and if ever the thought rises in
their minds that those whom they obey are the oppressors of God and
His Church, to remember that without His appointment they could
not have been, and that, after all, it is for their own faults they them
selves are most likely to endure evil even at the hands of Gentile
magistrates.
A A 4
360
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[OH. XIII.
Ilacra ^V^T) i^ovcriais vTrepe^ovcraLg v7roracrcr(T0o}. ov 13
yap O-TLV l^ovcria el /XT) VTTO I 9eov, at Se ovcrai VTTO Oeov 2
TCTay/xeVcu eicrtk wcrre 6 d^rtracrcro/xe^os rfj e^oucrta rfj 2
rov 0eov SiaTayf) dvOecrTrjKev ol Se dvOecrTyjKOTes eavrols
KplfJia \TJfJL\fjovTai. ol yap dpyovres OVK elcrlv <f)6/3os TV 3
dyaOo) tpy<p, d\\a TO) KaKoj. B #e Xei9 Se /XT) <o/3eco-#cu rr}z/
eovo-Lav ; TO dyaOov Troiei, Kai e^eis eiraivov ef avrr;?
yap Sta/co^d? Icrnv crot ets TO dyaOov. lav 8e TO 4
770177? ^>oy8o) ov yap ei/c^ TT)^ /xa^atpa^ <f)opel
deov yap Sia/co^ds eo*Tiz/ eK:St/cos ets opyrjv TM TO KO.KQV
e|oyo"tat UTT?) TOU
Trao-a if/vx*?? every soul, ] is used
here as the word soul or body in
English, simply for " person."
Compare 1 Pet. iii. 20. OKTW ^v-
8 T>V aya,6uv
a\\a rcav KO.KUV.
v7Tp\ovffaiQ, to pow
ers above them.~\ Comp. 1 Pet.
ii. 13. : vTToray^re iraar] avOpcj-
KTivei Sia rov Kvptov, e /re /3a-
a> i O.VTOV
ov yap eoriv iZovcria, K. r. \,^for
there is no power. ~\ " For there is
no power but has a Divine source,
and those that exist are appointed
by God." The second clause is
not a mere repetition ; it gives
emphasis ; what in the first clause
was a principle, is a fact in the
second. " All power is of God ;
those which exist among us, un
der which we live, are his express
appointment." The same thought
occurs in the Wis. of Sol. vi. 1
3., " Hear, O ye kings .....
for power is given you of the
Lord and sovereignty from the
Highest, who shall try your
works and search out your coun
sels."
The MS. authority is nearly e-
qually balanced between UTTO -S^ov,
the reading of the TextusRecep-
tus, in the first clause, and vVo
SEOV, which is Lachmann s. The
former of the two readings gives
the best sense, as it agrees best
with the generality of the first
clause. As ovaai corresponds to
eortv, so VTroTaffffeadd) to re raypevuty
which latter paronomasia is car
ried on in the next verse by av-
TiraffffofjLevoQ and Starayr). It may
be rendered in English " Let
every one be in his place under
the powers above him, for they
have their place from God him
self."
2. So that he who arrays him
self against the power, opposes
the appointment of God, a con
sequence of the previous verse ;
and (e slightly adversative = and
whatever they may think) they
that oppose, shall receive to
themselves condemnation. From
whom ? From the magistrate
apparently. Yet St. Paul does
not merely mean that they shall
suffer temporal punishment. As
in Matth. v. 21, 22., the punish
ment of the magistrate is the
symbol of a higher penalty which
they are to suifer, because he has
VEB. 14.]
EPISTLE TO THE HOMANS.
361
3 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers.
For there is no power but of God : the powers that be
2 are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the
power, resisteth the ordinance of God : and they that
3 resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers
are not a terror to the good work 1 , but to the evil. And*
wilt thou not be afraid of the power ? do that which is
good, and thou shalt have praise of the same : for he is
4 the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do
that which is evil, be afraid ; for he beareth not the
sword in vain : for he is the minister of God, a revenger
1 Good works.
the authority of God. By some
commentators the second verse
is connected with what follows :
"Thou shalt be punished; for
rulers are a terror, not to good
works, but to evil, which is a
proof that your resistance to au
thority is evil." This is far
fetched ; the latter words are
better taken in connexion, not
with the clause oi $s avdearrjKOTeL;
but with the general sense of the
two previous verses.
3. ol yap apxpvTtc,for rulersJ]
The dative (rw fyyw), which is
supported by a great prepon
derance of MS. authority, is the
true reading. The Apostle goes
on to give another reason why it
is our duty to obey magistrates,
besides their being divinely ap
pointed, because they are a terror,
not to the good work, but to the
evil. And would you be with
out fear of the magistrate ? Do
well, and he shall praise you as
a good citizen.
It maybe observed: (1.) That
St. Paul cannot have intended to
rule absolutely the question of
obedience to authority, if for no
other reason than this, that the
only case he supposes is that of a
just ruler. (2.) That the man
ner in which he speaks of ru
lers, is a presumption that the
Christians at Rome could not
have been at this time subject
to persecution from the autho
rities ; whence it may be in
ferred also that it was in re
ference to the temper of the
early Christians rather than to
any systematic persecution likely
to arouse it, these precepts were
given.
4. He will praise you, if you
do well, for he is the minister of
God to you (sc. if you do well)
for good. But if thou doest ill,
be afraid ; for he does not bear
the sword without purpose. For
he is the minister of God, an
avenger to execute wrath on him
that does evil.
Is the Apostle speaking of
rulers of this world as they are,
or as they ought to be ? Of nei-
ther,but of the feeling with which
the Christian is to regard them.
In general, he will be slow to
think evil of others ; in par tic u-
362
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[CH. XIII.
TrpdcrcrovTi. Sto aVay/o? vTroracrcrecr&u, ov \LQVQV Sta rrjv 5
opyrfv, aXXa Kal Sta rrjv o-vveiSiqcriv. Sta TOVTO yap /cat 6
<j)6povs reXetre* XetTovpyot yap Oeov elarlv ets avTo TOVTO
TrpOGTKapTpOVl>Te$. aVoSoTe 1 TTOLCTLP TO,? OC^CtXct?, TC? TOI> 7
</)6pOV TOV $6pOV, T0> TO TeXoS TO TeXo9, T(5 TCW <f)6/3ov TOV
<j)6/3ov, TO) Trjv Tiprjv TTJV rt^z/. /u/tySo l ^Se^ 6</>tXere, et 8
/AT) 2 TO aXXr/Xovs ayaTraV. 6 yap ayaTrwz TOJ> eTepov vo^ov
ov </>o^vo-et5, ov AcXe- 9
j, e^ TO> Xoya}
7T7r\TJpa)KV TO ya/o ov /^
i//et9 3 , ov/c eTTt^v/^cret?, /cat et Tts Tepa
4 aVa/ce(aXatovTat ? [ez^ Ta>J dyaTT^crets
1 Add o
8 Add 06
lar, of rulers. His temper will
be that of submission and mode
ration. He will acknowledge that
almost anj government is toler
able to the man who walks in
nocently, and that the govern
ments of mankind in general have
more of right and justice in them
than the generality of men are
apt to suppose. And lastly, he
will feel that, whatever they do,
they are in the hands of God, who
rules among the children of men ;
and, in general, that his relations
to them, like all the other relations
of Christian life, are to God also.
5. Therefore we must obey, not
only from fear of punishment, but
for conscience sake. Comp. 1 Pet.
ii. 13., vrroTayr)T iraffr) a.vOpu)7rivr)
Kriati (hci TOV Kvptov. In obeying
the magistrate, you are obeying
God ; you are " in foro consci-
entise," and you cannot disobey
without " the conscience being
defiled." 1 Cor. viii. 7.
opyfi, punishment, as in iii. 5.,
iv. 15., like the English word
" vengeance," including the act
of execution as well as the feel
ing which prompts it.
6. ia rovro, therefore,^ is at
once tjie proof and the conse-
2 rb d-ya.ita,v
4 eV Tovrcp rf
quence of what has preceded, and
may be referred to ver. 5., " Be
cause you must be subject for
conscience sake ; " or better, to
the whole preceding passage,
" Because of the Divine appoint
ment of rulers," which is again
repeated in the next clause.
The same remark which was
made in ver. 4. holds good here.
We are not to conceive St. Paul
as arguing absolutely that Caesar
had a right to tribute, but only
setting forth one side of the ques
tion, that is, the feeling with which
a religious man should regard the
exactions of a heathen govern
ment. As though he had said :
" When you see the tribute ga
therer sitting at the receipt of
custom, restrain the feelings that
might arise in your mind, with
the thought that he too is the
minister of God. Render unto
Caesar the things that are Caesar s/
because in so doing ye are ren
dering unto God the things that
are God s."
dg avTo TOVTO] may either be
explained (1.) by dg TO XeiTovp-
^ew, understood in \ei-
Seov, or (2.) referred to
what precedes "for the very
VER. 5-9.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
363
5 to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore
ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also
e for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute
also : for they are God s ministers, attending continually
7 for * this very thing. Eender 1 to all their dues : tri
bute to whom tribute is due ; custom to whom custom ;
8 fear to whom fear ; honour to whom honour. Owe no
man any thing, but to love one another: for he that
9 loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou
shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou
shalt not steal 2 , Thou shalt not covet; and if there be
any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in
this 3 , namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy-
1 ^(/(/therefore.
Add thou shalt not bear false witness.
Add saying.
purpose of receiving tribute ; "
the point is, that the Divine au
thority of magistrates is brought
home to the rebellious spirit in
the vulgar case of their receiving
tribute.
7. The Apostle goes on to
comprehend the particular in
stance of duty to magistrates
under a general head. \_ovv,
which would imply an inference,
is probably corrupt.] rw TOV
(popov is governed of some pas
sive verb understood in d<ptXde.
For the omission, comp. 2 Cor.
viii. 15.
8. The precept of the previous
verse is repeated in a stronger
negative form : " Owe no man
any thing." To which the Apostle
adds, but " to love one another."
Some have taken the word
d^eiXtre in different senses in the
two clauses. " Owe no man any
thing, only ye ought to love one
another." It is simpler, without
such a paronomasia, to explain
the words of the endless debt of
love : " Owe no man anything,
but to love one another ; " that
debt, we may add, which "owing
owe s not " and is alway due.
6 yap ayairutv TOV erfjoo^.] For
to owe this debt is the payment
of all debts. He that loveth his
neighbour, hath fulfilled the law.
Comp. Matt. xxii. 37, 38.
9. The Apostle, quoting ap
parently from Exodus, xx. 13.,
Deut. v. 18, 19., not according
to the Hebrew, but according to
copies of the LXX., which Philo
must have had (De Decalogo,
12. 24. 32.), like him, places
the seventh commandment be
fore the sixth. The same order
is observed in the quotation of
the Evangelists, Luke, xviii. 20.,
Mark, x. 19. ; the places of the
seventh and eighth being also
transposed in the Vatican MS.
of the LXX.
ft TIQ tripa eVroX?/.] The ninth
commandment is omitted.
3G4
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. XIII.
crov o>5 creavTov. 77 ayaTrrj ro> 77X770-10^ KaKov OVK epyd- 10
eTa,6* TrXT^ooJ/m ovv VOJJLOV 77 dydrrrj. Kal rovro t8dre5 11
TOZ^ Kaipov, on a>pa 77877 v/x,a,5 x ef VTTVOV tyepOfjvai vvv yap
eyyvrepov fjucov 77 crcoTTjpia 77 ore eTTtcrrevcrajLte^. 77 w^ 12
7rpoeKo\jJVj 77 Se Tjf^epa ijyyLKev 0,770 OwjJieOa ovv ra epya
TOV CTKOTOVS, vSvora)fJLe0a 2 Se ra oTrXa roi) (^>o)TO5. o>5 ez^ 13
rjjjiepa ev(7V77/>td^o)5 TreptTrarT^crw/xe^ ^77 /co^uoi5 Acal fJLedaus,
fjirj Koirais Kal acreXyeuu5, /^T) eptSt Kal 77X0) dXX ez/Sv- 14
)W. 2 KCli
10. Or to come to the conclu
sion in a different way. Love
works no ill to our neighbour;
that is to say, it breaks none of the
commandments of the law which
have been just mentioned, there
fore, in other words, love fulfils
the law. (11 13.) What follows,
the Apostle has clothed in an
allegory. The night is far spent,
the day is at hand. It is mid
night still, and yet he seems
to see the morning light. He
has been awake, while others
slept. Surely the night is far
spent, he says, it cannot be so
long as it was.
11. KOI TOVTO, and this too.~\
1 Cor. vi. 6 8. ; Eph. ii. 8.
It has been remarked that in
the New Testament we find no ex
hortations grounded on the short
ness of life. As if the end of
life had no practical importance
for the first believers, compared
with the clay of the Lord. Like
one of the old prophets, St. Paul
already seems to see " the morn
ing spread upon the mountains."
The night has endured long
enough, and the ends of the
world are come. Comp. 1 Thess.
v. 1 5., and Essay in Vol. I.
On Belief in the Coming of Christ.
vvv yap iyyvrepov //yuwy // CTW-
for now our salvation is
nearer than when we believed.^
So much time has elapsed since
we first received the Gospel, that
he cannot long delay his coming.
Yet the very consciousness of
this is not unlike the feeling
expressed in 2 Peter, iii. 4. :
"Where is the promise of his
coming ? for since the fathers
fell asleep, all things continue as
they were from the beginning of
the creation."
Cornp. Ezekiel, xii. 22, 23. :
" Son of man, what is that pro
verb that ye have in the land of
Israel, saying, The days are pro
longed, and every vision faileth ?
"Tell them therefore, Thus
saith the Lord God, I will make
this proverb to cease, and they
shall no more use it as a proverb
in Israel ; but say unto them,
The days are at hand, and the
effect of every vision."
jjfjLojv may be taken either
with rj ffwrrjpia, Eph. i. 13., Phil,
ii. 12., or with eyyvrepov.
But why should the Apostle
address the Roman Christians in
such startling language ? Had
they been asleep like the heathen
around them ? It is the language
of the preacher now and then,
and in the old time before that
VER. 1014.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
365
10 self. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour : therefore
11 love is the fulfilling of the law. And this,* knowing the
time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for
12 now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. The
night is far spent, the day is at hand : let us therefore
cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the
13 armour of light. Let us walk honestly, as in the day;
not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and
14 wantonness, not in strife and envying. But put ye on
" Awake thou that sleepest,
and arise from the dead," which,
however often repeated, finds
men sleeping still.
12. ?/ vvt, 7rpoeKo\Lev, the night
is far spent. ] The night is far
spent ; let us lay aside the gar
ment of the night, that is, the
deeds of darkness. The idea of
a garment is contained in a-n-odw-
ju0a, which is opposed to evSv-
ffM^eda in what follows. " And
let us put on the armour of light ;"
compare Eph. vi. The Greek
Fathers give several reasons why
in the first clause the Apostle
should have used the word e joya,
and in the second oVXa. If any
reason is necessary, it may be
said to arise from the latter word
being more appropriate to express
the position of the Christian in
this world, arrayed for the con
flict against evil.
13. As in the face of day, let
us walk decently. Two figures
of speech here blend. Let us
walk as in the light of day, let
us walk as in the day of the
Lord ; let us walk as men com
monly do in the eyes of their
fellow-men, remembering that we
are walking in the eye of God.
jj-r) Kit)fj.OLQ . . . fjtrj KoiYcue.] On
what analogy are these cases to
be explained ? Those who re
gard them as datives of relation,
say that they are governed of the
idea of Zwpev contained in the
words evayiiiAovuc Trepnrarrjffii)^^.
But datives of relation cannot be
assumed at pleasure, and although
i]v flew, or even ^v Koiraig, may
be Greek, it does not follow
that TrepiTrarelv Kolraic, in the
sense of to walk for, or in re
ference to, something, will be an
allowable expression, unless as
sisted by some similar use of the
dative with another verb in a
parallel clause. Some other ex
planation of the cases in question
is required. It is not, however,
necessary that the grammarian
should confine himself to any
single way of conceiving the re
lation expressed by them. Either
they follow the analogy of 63
TrepiTrarelv, or kv is omitted (a
mode of speech which may be
fairly used where kv is commonly
inserted), or they are datives of
the rule as it is termed, like ro7e
edeffi 7repi7ra.Te~tv, in Acts, xxi. 21.,
or grammar fails, and, as often in
Sophocles, an obscure sense of two
or three imperfect constructions
may make up a good one.
14. Ivdvaraade, put on.~] Com
pare Gal. iii. 27., where the word
366 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. [Cn. XIII.
TOP Kvpiov ^Irfcrovv yjpicrTOV, /cat rrjs crapKos irpo-
occurs, as perhaps also here, with clothed after coming up out of
an allusion to the garment in the water; "For as many of
which the baptized person was you as were baptized into Christ,
VEB. 14.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 367
the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the
flesh, unto* the lusts thereof.
have put on Christ." Compare result and object ; as elsewhere,
notes on 1 Thess. v. 1 10. " which thing tends to lust/
etc 7ri0u/ ae.] Confusion of
368 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
CHAP XIV.
IT has been already stated, that we hardly know anything of the
Roman Church. Hence the illustrations of the present chapter
must rather consist in references to the floating opinions of the
time than to precise facts. Even in regard to what we may
seem to gather from the Epistle itself, it is not quite certain whether
St. Paul is speaking from a knowledge of the circmnftancefl of a
Church which he had never visited, or from what he knew of the
state of other Churches and of general tendencies in the mind of the
fir.-.t believers, or in the age generally. lie may have had among
his numerous acquaintances (xvi.) some who, like the household of
Chloe at Corinth, brought him news of what passed among the
Christians at Rome. On the other hand, it may be remarked that a
mention of similar observances to those here spoken of, recurs
in the Kpi.stlo to the Colossians ; arid that a like scrupulosity of
temper appears to have existed among the converts at Corinth.
The practices about which the first believers had scruples and on
which the Apostle here touches, were the use of animal food, and
the observance of special days. The most probable guess at the
nature of these scruples is that they were of half- Jewish, half-Oriental
origin ; similar practices existed among .Jewish Essenes or Gentile
Pythagoreans. Abstinence from animal food may be regarded
as one among many indications of the ever-increasing influence
of the East upon the West ; unnatural as it seems to us, like
circumcision it had become a second nature to a great portion
of mankind. Fancy represented the eating of flesh as a species
of cannibalism, and the Ebioriites declared the practice to be an
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 369
nvcntion of evil demons (Cleni. Hom. viii. 10 16.). And with
those who were far from superstitions of this kind, the fear of eating
things offered to idols, or forbidden by the Mosaic law, operated so
as to make them abstain where there was a danger of contact with
Gentiles. Instances of such scruples occur in the book of Daniel
and the Apocrypha. It was the glory of Daniel and the three holy
children that they would " not defile themselves with the portion of
the King s food ; " Dan. i. 8. So Tobit " kept himself from eating
the bread of the Gentiles;" i. 10, 11. Judas Maccabeus and nine
others, living " in the mountains after the manner of beasts, fed on
herbs continually, lest they should become partakers of the pollu
tion ;" 2 Mace. v. 27. Such examples show what the Jews had
learned to practise or admire in the centuries immediately preceding
the Christian era. So John the Baptist, in the narrative of the
Gospels, "fed on locusts and wild honey." A later age delighted to
attribute a similar abstinence to James the brother of the Lord
(Heges. apud Euseb. H. E. ii. 23.) ; and to Matthew (Clem. Alex.
IVd. ii. 1. p. 174.): heretical writers added Peter to the list of these
em-rat it es (Kpiph. Her. xxx. 2., Clem. Hom. xii. 6.). The Aposto
lical canons (Ii. liii.) admit an ascetic abstinence, but denounce those
who abstain from any sense of the impurity of matter. See passages
quoted in Fritsche, vol. iii. pp. 151, 152.
Jewish, as well as Alexandrian and Oriental influences, combined
to maintain the practice of abstinence from animal food in the first
centuries. Long after it had ceased to be a Jewish scruple, it
remained as a counsel of perfection. In earlier ages, it was the
former more than the latter. Those for whom the Apostle is urging
consideration are the weak, rather than the strong ; not the ascetic,
delighting to make physical purity the out ward sign of holiness of
life against him it might have been necessary to contend for tho
freedom of the Gospel, but " the babe in Christ/ feeble in heart
and confused in head, who could not disengage himself from opinions
or practices which he saw around him ; for whom, nevertheless.
Christ died.
VOL. II. B B
370 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
Respecting the second point of the observance of days, we know
no more than may be gathered from Gal. iv. 9, 10. 17., " How turn
ye again to the weak and beggarly elements whereunto ye again
desire to be in bondage ? ye observe days, and months, and times,
and years ; " where the Apostle is writing to a Church entangled
in Judaism, which he therefore thinks it necessary to denounce :
and Col. ii. 16., "Let no man therefore judge you in respect of
an holyday or a new moon, or of the sabbath days : " where the
Apostle also reproves the same spirit as inconsistent with the
close connexion or rather identity of the believer with his Lord.
Whether in the Epistle to the Romans he is alluding to the Jewish
observance of the Sabbath is uncertain ; his main point is that the
matter, whatever it was, should be left indifferent, and not determined
by any decision of the Church. Superstitions of another kind may
have also found their way among the Roman as well as the Colossian
and Galatian converts. Astrology was practised both by Jew and
Gentile ; nor is it improbable that something of a heathen mingled
with what was mainly of a Jewish character ; the context of the two
passages just quoted (Col. ii. 18. 20., Gal. iv. 9.), would lead us to
think SO. It is true that the words, og p,ev Kpivei fipepav Trap fyue pcu ,
oe le Kptvei TTCLaav fjplpav (ver. 5.), probably mean only that " one
man fasts on alternate days, another fasts every day." But the ex
pression 6 (j)pov&v Trjvfjjjiepav, in ver. 6., implies also the observance of
particular days.
It has been already intimated, that this chapter furnishes no sure
criterion that the Roman converts were either Jews or Gentiles.
If it be admitted that it has any bearing at all on the state of
the Roman converts, it tends to show that they were, not simply
Gentiles converted from the ancient religion of Rome to Judaism or
Christianity, but persons into whose minds Oriental notions had pre
viously insinuated themselves, who with or before Christianity had
received distinctions of days, and of meats and drinks, which in St.
Paul s view were the very opposite of it. If, on the other hand, we
suppose St, Paul to have written without any precise knowledge of
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 371
the state of the Roman Church, we may regard this chapter, and part
of that which follows, as characteristic of the general feeling in the
Churches to which the Apostle preached.
The subject recurs in the eighth and tenth chapters of the First
Epistle to the Corinthians. Here, as there, the Apostle knows
but one way of treating these scruples and distinctions which
were so alien to his own mind. It may be shortly described
as absorbing the letter in the Spirit. When you see the weak
brother doubting about his paltry observances, remember that
the strength of God is sufficient for him ; when you feel disposed to
judge him, consider that he is another s servant, and that God will
judge both him and you ; when you rejoice in your own liberty, do
not forget that this liberty may be to him " an occasion of stum
bling." Place yourself above his weaknesses by placing yourself
below them, remembering that your very strength gives him a claim
on you for support."
B B 2
372
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
. XIV.
, Tbv Se OLO-Otvovvroi rfj Trtcrret 7rpoo-Xaju,/3aVeo-#e pr) eis 14
Sia/cpio-eis StaXoytcr/xa)^. os /xej> Trio-revet ^ayei^ Trdvra, 6 2
Se acrOevvv \a\ava ecr^tet. 6 ecrOlw TOP pr) IcrOiovTa JUT) 3
cgovOeveira), 6 Se /XT) ecrOiojv l rov ecrO iovTa JUT) Kpivtru
6 0eos yap avroj> TrpocreXa/JeTO. crv TIS el 6 Kplvuv dX- 4
\6rpiov oiKer^v; rw iSi<u Kvpuy crr^/cei 77 TTiTrret oTaftf-
crerat Se, Swarei yap 2 6 Kvpios crrirjcrai avTov. 09 /^ez 5
[yap 3 ] Acpit ei j]^pav Trap ^pepav, os Se /cpu>et Tracrav
rrj
1 K0.16 f.
XIV. 1. TOV aaQtvovvTO.
him that is weak in tfie
faith.~] These words do not mean
him that has a half-belief in
Christianity, but him that doubt-
eth, him that has not an enlight
ened belief, who has not "know
ledge/* whose " conscience being
weak," is liable " to be denied."
Comp. 1 Cor. viii. 1. 7.
pun , not to judge his doubtful
thoughts. ~\ From the word SictKpi-
reffdai in ver. 23. being used for
to doubt, it is inferred in the
English version, that the word
ItuKpitng may be used in the sense
of doubtings, "not to doubtful
disputations." This is the fallacy
of paronymous words ; the real
meaning of diaKpung is " discern
ing, determining." " Receive
him that is weak, not to determi
nations of matters of dispute."
"Receive him that is weak," says
the Apostle ; but then occurs
the afterthought, " do not deter
mine his scruples ; that might
be injurious to the Church, and
narrow its pale by excluding
others who have another kind of
scruple."
2. OQ iitv TTiffrevei, one man be-
lieveth.~\ Not as in the English
Version, one man believeth that
he may eat all things, but in the
same sense as 7ricr-tg of the pre-
7ap
3 Om. 70/3.
ceding verse " one man has
faith so that he eats all things."
The play of words in Tr/orie and
TTiffTEVEi is confirmed by num
berless similar instances in St.
Paul s writings. Compare ver.
22., <TV TTL<TTIV zxetQ.
6 Se aaQtv>Gn>.~\ " But the weak,
of whom I spoke before ; " not
opposed to OQ /ztV, but referring
to ver. 1.
3. 6 iffQiwv, let not him that
eateth.~\ If the clause in which
these words are contained refers
to what immediately precedes, 6
iaQlwv must have Xa^ava sup
plied after it. "Let not him that
eateth herbs, despise him that
eateth all things ; " or, in other
words, does not maintain the
same ascetic purity as himself.
But then what is to be made of
what follows? " Let not him that
eateth not herbs (specially) judge
him that eateth." For we should
expect that the more scrupulous
should judge the less so, not the
reverse.
It is better to take the words
generally, without reference to
preceding Xa^ava eaOlei. The
Apostle means to distinguish two
classes, those who eat and those
who abstain ; the characteristic
which he feared in the former
class being contempt of others; in
the latter censoriousness. This
VER. 15.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
373
1 4 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, not to judge *
2 his doubtful thoughts. For one has* faith to eat all
3 things : but* he that is weak, eateth herbs. Let not
him that eateth despise him that eateth not ; and let
4 not him which eateth riot judge him that eateth : for God
hath received him. AVho art thou that judgest another s
servant? to his own Lord* he standeth or falleth.
s And hold en up he shall be*: for the Lord is able to
make him stand. One man approves * every other day :
another approves every day. Let every man be fully
is expressed in the opposition of
i^ovOeveiriijSind Kpiverd). Narrow-
minded scrupulous men judge
others by their own petty stan
dard; men of the world are hardly
less intolerant in despising scru
ples.
6 S EOQ yap avrov TrpOffe\atTO.~]
For it is not you who receive him
into the Church, but God. Strictly
speaking, these words refer only
to the preceding clause, but they
may be applied by analogy to the
previous one. Compare xv. 7:
10 TrpOffXap&avEffOe aXXr/Xouc, KO.-
OWQ KCU b xpHTTOG TrpocreXa&ero Vjuae
EIQ ^6^,av ruv Seov.
4. The Apostle speaks gene
rally, intending to include both
the cases mentioned in the pre
vious verse. As he argued in
the last chapter " You ought
to pay tribute, for it is a debt to
God ; " so here he urges, that to
judge our brother in matters in
different, is taking a liberty with
another man s servant. "Who
art thou who judgest the servant
of another man ? It is no con
cern of yours ; not to you but to
his own Master is he accountable,
whether he stand or fall." And
then, as if it were a word of ill
omen even to suggest that he
should fall, he adds, but he shall
stand, as we may in faith believe,
for God is able to make him
stand. He is a weak brother,
I speak as a man, therefore he is
likely to fall. But, believing in
the omnipotence of God, I say he
is so much more likely to stand
also, for " my strength is per
fected in weakness." Compare
James, iv. 12., "There is one
lawgiver who is able to save and
to destroy ; who art thou that
j udgest another ? " and Rom. ix.
20.
5. o fj.v Kpivti ?//.tpcu> Trap
y/juc paj , one man approves every
other day^\ is parallel to the
second verse. The Apostle takes
up the subject in reference to
another scruple. The words have
been explained, (1.) one approves
alternate days, another every day;
or, (2.) one judges one day before
another, another judges every
day to be the same ; or, (3.) one
man approves alternate days
[for eating flesh], another every
day.
The third of these interpreta
tions gives a good sense, but re
quires too great an addition to
the words of the original, Kpivet
(sc. ecrOien ), to be admissible. The
B B 3
374
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
CCn. XIV.
/cat
pav e/cacrros Iv ra> tStw VOL TrXrjpo^opeicrOo). 6 (j>pova>v 6
rjpepav Kvpico (frpovel. 1 /cat 6 ecr#tW Kvpia> e<r#tei*
yap T & 6ea) /cat 6 /AT? lo-0io*v KVpia* OVK ecr#tet
rw #ea>. ouSets yap ^/AWI/ eavrw 77, /cat 7
eavro) aVo^r/cr/cer edV re yap <S/xei>, rw /cv/otw 8
, edV re a7ro0TJcrKO[jiv 2 , TOJ Kvpiaj ai
lav re oi> tfiptv lav re aTTo0VTJ<TKOp J ev, rov Kvpiov e
ets TOVTO yap ^otcrros airedavev /cat e&rjcrev 3 , tVa /cat veKpa>v 9
1 Add Koi 6
2
<f>povwv r)]v ripspav Kvpiy ov (ppovei.
second also gives a good sense,
and agrees with the style of St.
Paul in the play upon the word
Kplvei,, which has its meaning in
the first clause carried on in the
second. As we might say, " one
man sets apart a seventh portion
of time for a sabbath, another
makes every day a sabbath."
No authority can, however, be
adduced for Trap j/^ue pay in the
sense of " before another day,"
while the phrase fyu|oa> Trap
fyuEjoai/ is common in the sense of
alternate days. We are there
fore compelled to adopt the first
interpretation. One man selects,
approves, distinguishes alternate
days ; another man selects every
day. The meaning of Kpiret in
the first clause is played upon in
the second. A further play on
the word Kpivw occurs in ver. 13.
tKCLffTOQ f.V TO) iSlO) VOl.~\ Let
each be satisfied in his own mind,
not compelled by some external
rule. This individual liberty of
conscience is with the Apostle an
essential part of the Gospel, a
law for ourselves, and to be re
spected in others.
6. Whether we eat flesh and
observe days or not, we are all
Christians ; we do not disagree
in the main point, which is doing
Kal
all to the glory of God. He who
eats, and he who abstains, agree
in giving God thanks.
As our Lord answers the diffi
culties put to him by the Phari
sees by stirring higher and deeper
questions, as St. Paul himself
concludes the discussion on mar
riage, by carrying it into another
world, " It remaineth, that they
that have wives be as though
they had none," 1 Cor. vii. 29. ;
as touching meats offered to idols
he allows the rule of Christian
charity to weaker brethren to be
superseded by the wider and more
general principle, " Whether ye
eat or drink, do all to the glory
of God," 1 Cor. x. 31. : as the
possibility of the Christian " liv
ing in sin that grace may abound,"
is dispelled by the thought of
union with Christ ; so too, scru
ples respecting meats and drinks
are lost in the sense of our rela
tion to Christ and God, which
furnishes the practical rule for
our treatment of them. The re
membrance of this common rela
tion is also an assurance both to
the lax and the strict, that the
brethren whom they judge or
despise are believers equally with
themselves.
7 and 8. " For in discussing
VER. 69.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
375
e persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the
day, regardeth it unto the Lord. 1 He that eateth,
eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks ; and he
that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth
7 God thanks. For none of us liveth to himself, and no
s man dieth to himself. For whether we live, we live
unto the Lord ; and whether we die, we die unto the
Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the
9 Lord s. For to this end Christ both died, and lived 2 ,
that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
1 Add and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord doth not regard it.
2 Rose. Add and revived.
these questions we are insensibly
led on to higher thoughts. No
one of us liveth unto himself, and
none of us dieth unto himself.
Whether we live, or whether we
die, it is unto the Lord, whose we
are. It is observable that the two
expressions lavrw 77 and tavrw
cnroSrJjffKei are not taken in pre
cisely the same sense, but with
a difference similar to that in
chap. vi. 10., rrj afjiapriq airiQavtv
0a7ra . . . . 4/7 rw Sew.
What do all these things matter
to him whose life is hid with
Christ in God, who feels that
nothing can separate him from
Christ, who thinks of them in
connexion only with the life of
Christ ?
8. As men and women may be
said to live for one another, as
Christ is said to live unto God,
so the believer is said to live unto
Christ. Compare 1 Cor. vi. 19.,
OVK e 0T lavTfeh , " JQ are not your
own ;" and 1 Thess. v. 10., "Who
died for us, that whether we wake
or sleep, we should be the Lord s."
The genitive expresses a closer
and more intimate relation of
Christ to the believer than the
dative, which precedes. We live
and die to Him, and therefore are
His : neither life nor death can
make us cease to be so.
9. Here, as in ch. iv. ver. 25.,
there is a correspondence be
tween the life of Christ and that
of his followers " We live and
die unto the Lord, and this was
the reason why Christ died and
lived ; " to which is added a
further statement of the same
reason, " that he might be our
Lord in life and death." The
order of the words airiBavev KOL
ifaffE shows that the life here
spoken of is the resurrection.
Hence the word " lived " is not
taken in precisely the same sense
as " the living " in the following
clause.
It is argued that we cannot
suppose the Apostle to have
meant that Christ died that he
might rule the dead, and rose
again that he might rule the
living ; but that the two clauses
must be taken as one ; " Christ
died and rose again that he
might be the ruler over all."
The remarks made on iv. 25. are
applicable here. The distribution
B 4
376
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[OH. XIV.
Kal
Kvpievcrrj. crv Se TL Kpiveis rov dSeX^bV crov ; 10
TI Kal crv ri i^ovOevtis rov dSeX(oV crov ; TrdVres yap ira-
pacTTrjcrofJieOa r< yS^/xarc rou Oeov. 1 yeypaTrrai yap Zw n
eyw, Xeyei Kvpios, on e/xot Ka^ei Trav yovv, Kal
Xoy^crerat Trdcra yXwcrcra 2 TG>
Treyot eavrov Xdyoz> aTroSwcret 4 [ra
Xovs KpLvcofJLev, dXXd rovro Kpivart
ra> dSeXa) <r/cd^8aXoz/.
d pa 3 eKacrTOs
12
- 13
oTSa
TO JU,T)
Kal TreVetor/xat 14
of the clauses in the present in
stance is to our mode of thought
unnatural, but it was natural to
St. Paul, who divides and sub
divides Christ s life analogously
to the life of the believer.
There appeared to the Apostle
a certain fitness in Christ being
like us, tempted in all points like
as we are, and therefore able to
succour them that are tempted ;
crucified, even as we are to cru
cify the lusts of the flesh ; dying,
that we may die with Him ; rising
again, that we may rise with Him.
It is not simply that He once over
came death for us, or was offered
up a sacrifice for sin. The Apo
stle s view is more present and
lively, though from its not having
passed into the language of creeds
and articles, and perhaps also
from something which we feel in
it that belongs to another age, it
has fallen out of daily use. Not
only is Christ the source of the
believer s acts, but He is the
image of him in the different parts
of his life. The believer is trans
formed into His likeness, not
merely by putting on Christ,
that is, by being clothed with
His holiness, or in vested with His
merits, but by going through the
stages of His existence. We can
not precisely analyse what the
Add o
4 Swcret.
Apostle meant by this "iden
tity," the superficial form of
which is due to the peculiar
rhetorical character of the age.
the deeper and hidden thought
being that, both inwardly and
outwardly, as He was, so ought
we to be, so are we in this
world.
Kvpitv(T7).~] Comp. Kvptoc, ver. 8.
10. (TV de ri KpivetQ ;] "But why
dost thou judge thy brother?"
As in other passages, the Apostle
recapitulates his former thought
(comp. ver. 4. and Rom. iii. 1.,
iv. 1.), the relation in which we
all stand to Christ, on which he
has been dwelling in the previous
verses, being a new reason for
abstaining from judging others.
3e .] "But seeing that we are
to live, not for ourselves, but
for Christ, who also lived and
died for us, why dost thou judge
another ? " The 5c also anticipates
an opposition to the clause follow
ing. The words, Kpivuv and i&v-
Oev~iv, are repeated from ver. 3. ;
they differ from each other as
the spirit of cavilling or censo-
riousness from contempt. Com
pare the words of Christ, Matth.
xviii. 6. 10, 11., " Whosoever shall
offend one of these little ones
which believe in me, it were bet
ter for him that a millstone were
VER. 1014.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
377
10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost
thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand
11 before the judgment seat of God. 1 For it is written,
As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me,
12 and every tongue shall confess to God. So then every
is one of us shall give account of himself to God. Let us
not therefore judge one another any more: but judge
this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an
14 occasion to fall in his brother s way. I know, and am
1 Christ.
hanged about his neck, and that
he were cast into the sea."
In ver. 4. the Apostle had said
" Who art thou who judgest
another man s servant ; " here he
gives a new aspect to the thought
"Why dost thou judge thy
brother? for he and you alike, and
all of us, have another judge."
Compare 2 Cor. v. 10., whence
the various reading xpiarov is
probably derived.
11. The prediction of a future
judgment the Apostle further
confirms from Isaiah, xlv . 23.,
which he quotes according to the
Alexandrian MS. of the LXX.
The OTL is dependent on the idea
of asseveration contained in 6i
iyw.
soyuo\oyi7<77cu, shall confess,^
but whether their sins, or the
truth that God is God, is not
precisely stated. The connexion
favours the first sense ; the pa
rallel passage of Phil. ii. 11. tends
to confirm the second. " Every
tongue shall confess that Jesus
Christ is Lord, to the glory of
God the Father." The LXX.
use bpoXoye~ia6ai almost exclu
sively in the sense of " giving
praises," " returning thanks to."
And such is probably its meaning
in the original passage. But
here, as often elsewhere, the
meaning of the original is not a
guide to the meaning of the ap
plication ; the connexion espe
cially with ver. 12. shows that the
word is taken, as commonly in
the N. T., in the sense of " con
fess."
12. So then it will not be about
others, but about himself that each
one of us will have to give an ac
count. The emphasis is on Trepl
lavrov.
13. Let us not, therefore, per
sist any longer in determining
that this man is right, and that
man wrong ; but let us rather
determine not to put a stumbling-
block in our brother s way.
For the latter sense given to
Kpivw in the paronomasia, comp.
2 Cor. ii. 1., eKpiva
TO TO prj iraXiv kv Xvrrrj
of
is an explanation
14. The Apostle goes on to
explain the feeling under which
he says all this ; not that he dis
agrees with the stronger brethren
who suppose that all these things
are indifferent. Indeed as a Chris
tian (eV Kvpty Irjfrov) he knows as
378
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[On. XIV.
yap 2 Sia is
lv KVpia) Irjcrov on ovSev KOIVOV SL avrov 1 , el /AT)
rt KOIVOV elvcu,, e/cei^o) KOIVO
6 dSeX(o9 crov XuTmrai, ov/ceri Kara ayTrrjv wepi-
JLCT) r<5 ^p^^ari crov IKCLVOV dVdXXve, v?rep o5
aireOavev. /XT) /SXacr^/xeur^a) ow v/xwz^ TO dya#oV. 16
ou yap icrnv TI /BacriXeia rov 0eov ySpaJcrts /cat TTOCTIS, dXXa 17
English reflexive use of the word
"self."
15. "For reasoning with you
I say that, if you pain your
brother, you violate the law of
love." That he may be so pained
has been already intimated in
the words, IfcetVw KOLVOV. ya/o,
which is not the reading of the
Textus Keceptus, but of the far
greater number of MS., may also
be referred back with more pre
cision to ver. 13., " For if you do
put an offence in your brother s
wa y> you violate the rule of love."
The Gospel is the law of free
dom, and cannot by any possibility
admit scruples respecting meats
and drinks. But when we have
not our own case to consider, but
that of our brethren, when (to
bring the precept home to our
selves) the difference between us
is the question of a sabbath day,
the very same principle of free
dom leads us to avoid giving
offence by our freedom. Our
brother sees strongly the sin and
guilt of what we nevertheless
know to be our Christian liberty,
and love must induce us to
abridge our rights for his sake.
We must not take him by force,
and compel him to witness what
he supposes to be our evil ; still
less must we induce him to follow
our example and defile his con
science. Yet we cannot say that
we must give up everything
well as they do, that the distinc
tion of clean and unclean meats
is a mere superstition. " Not
that which goeth into a man
defileth a man." He says so
broadly and generally, but his
object is to show that this makes
no difference in the case of an
other. " Your conscience cannot
judge for him, your knowledge
will not pluck the scruple from
his soul." Therefore, however
much he knows all this, he will
not act upon it ; the right use of
his strength is to support his
brother s weakness.
The words kv Kvpta) Irjffov do
not mean as one taught by
Christ, as one who has received
a revelation from Christ. They
are simply the form in which St.
Paul expresses his living and
doing all things in Christ, as in
language colder and more na
tural to our time, we might say
as " a Christian."
2t ai/7-ov, not "through Christ,"
but " in itself ;" a meaning of the
words which does not require
avrov any more than it is required
in such expressions as avrol rear
ai/rwj , &c., in the Tragic writers.
The reading is frequently un
certain. But there is nothing
contrary to the genius of the
Greek language, in such a use of
the demonstrative, which is not
uncommon, especially in Homer,
and may be compared with the
VER 1517.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
379
persuaded in* the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing
unclean of itself: but to him that esteeineth any thing
is to be unclean, to him it is unclean. For 1 if thy brother
be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not chari
tably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ
Jy died. Let not then your good be evil spoken of: for the
But.
that offends our brother. Such
a rule would be impracticable,
and if not impracticable, often
full of evil. It was not the rule
which St. Paul himself adopted
with the Judaizers, " to whom he
gave way, no, not for an hour."
It is not the rule which he en
joins when matters of import
ance are at stake ; and the most
indifferent things cease to be
indifferent the moment an at
tempt is made to impose them
upon others. Only in reference
to the particular circumstances
of the Church, and to the pas
sions of men ever prone to exag
gerate their party differences, the
rule of consideration for others
is the safer side.
p) ru /3pw/.tct7t,] sc. by the eat
ing flesh, comp. ver. 21. Either
by being induced against his
conscience to imitate the exam
ple set him ; or more probably,
by the antagonism which would
be aroused in his bosom, towards
his brethren.
v?rep ov xpiffTog a.TriQa.ve.v.~\ De
stroy not him with thy meat,
whom Christ thought of so much
importance that he died for him ;
" Ne pluris feceris cibum tuum
quam Christus vitam suam."
Bengel.
16. pf) /3Aa 0-^77 jue7<70w ovv vpuJv
TO ayat)6v, let not then your good
be evil spoken of.~\ Either the
precept is general, " let us live
innocently so as to give no place
to reproach," or, with more point,
the words may be referred to
the case of the stronger brethren.
Let not that good or superiority
which we have in our Christian
freedom be a matter of reproach
with others In this latter case,
if we read vjuwi , the Apostle is
addressing the stronger brethren ;
if j/juwy, he is identifying himself
with them.
It is a good thing, we might
say, to know that Christ does not
require of us the observance of
the Jewish sabbath ; it is a good
thing to know that, without form
of prayer or set times and places,
"neither in Jerusalem nor on this
mountain," we can worship the
Father ; to know that there is
no rite or ceremony or ordinance
that God cannot dispense with ;
or rather, that there is none
which we are required to observe,
except so far as they tend to a
moral end. It is a good thing to
know that Revelation can be in
terpreted by no other light than
that of reason; it is a good thing
to know that God is not extreme
to mark human infirmities in our
lives and conduct. But all this
may serve for a cloak of licenti
ousness, may be a scandal among
men, and humanly speaking, the
destruction of those for whom
Christ died.
17. ov yap iffrtv r/ ficiffiXela TOU
deov pp&ifftf teal Traffic.^ For the
kincrdom of God does not consist
380
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. XIV.
o 18
KCLl
TOVTO) oVVO)P yjplO TO) vpO~TOS Tto)
So/aju,og roc? av9pa>TTOis. dpa ovv ra TT)S elpTJvrjs SLOJ- 19
Kal rd rrjs oi/coSo//,?}? TT}? eis dXXTyXov?. ju,?} 20
ySpw/taros KardXve TO epyov rov $eou,
KaOapd, clXXa KOLKOV TO* dv0pM7rq> rw Sia
IcrOlovTi KOL\OV TO /XT)
6 d8eX^)09 o~ov TrpocrKOTrrei rj
rj
Om.
of sensual goods, but of Christian
graces. The kingdom of heaven
of which the Apostle is speaking
is the kingdom of God that is
within, the life hidden with
Christ and God ; not the visible
Church, or the doctrine which
Christ and his Apostles taught.
dXAct StKaioavi r), K. T. X.] In
these words the Apostle de
scribes generally the inward and
moral character of the kingdom
of God, with an allusion to the
subject of their differences in the
word peace.
X|oa.] The Christian cha
racter naturally suggests ideas of
sorrow, of peace, of consolation ;
not so naturally to ourselves the
thought of joy and glorying
which constantly recurs in the
writings of the Apostle. These
seem to belong to that circle of
Christian graces, of which hope
is the centre, which have almost
vanished in the phraseology of
modern times, kv irvevjjaTi ay/w,
a holy joy, like all the other feel
ings of the Christian, seeking for
its ground in some power beyond
him, that is to say, in communion
with the Spirit of God.
18. kv TOVTG),^ llOt kv TOVTOIQ., IS
the true reading, though the more
difficult to explain. It can scarcely
be referred to anything, except
kv irrtvpciTi ay la), which precedes.
For he who is the servant of
Christ, not in the performance of
external rites, but inwardly in
communion with the Holy Spirit,
is acceptable to God and ac
counted worthy among men. The
last two expressions have refer
ence to " the kingdom of God," in
ver. 17. ; and to the precept not
to let our good be evil spoken of,
in ver. 16. : "For he who in the
Spirit serves Christ, has entered
into the kingdom of God, and is
not ill spoken of among men."
19. apa ovv ra rrjg elpi)vi]g tw-
Kwjuej Kal TO. riJQ olKoSopije ri]Q HQ
a\\ii\ovQ.~] So then, we pursue
the things which tend to peace,
and to the building up of one
another in the faith. Compare
1 Cor. iii. 9.
20. is in part a repetition of
ver. 15. with the addition of TO
tpyov rov Seov, which latter words
may either be taken in connexion
with the preceding (ra riyg dpijvriQ
and ra Tijg okoc!ojur/e), as meaning
the Christian life, which consists
in peace and edifying, or better
and more in St. Paul s manner,
in reference to the weak brother
21
crv TTLCTTLP f)v 2 e)(is 3 /caTa creavToz 22
YER. 1822.] EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
381
kingdom of God is not meat and drink ; but righteous-
is ness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. For
he that in this 1 serveth Christ is acceptable to God,
19 and approved of men. Let us therefore follow after
the things which make for peace, and things where-
20 with one may edify another. For meat destroy not
the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but
21 it is evil for that man who eateth with offence. It
is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor
any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is of-
22 fended, or is made weak. The faith which thou hast
1 These things.
himself, who, as other believers,
might be termed the work of
God. TO roil SEOV epyov thus be
comes also a repetition of eKtlvov,
in ver. 15.
As in ver. 14. the Apostle
admitted the objections which
he himself put into the mouth
of those who held meats and
drinks to be indifferent, and re
plied to them, so here, he again
expresses his agreement in prin
ciple with the stronger party,
only to state with more force his
precepts about the weaker bre
thren. " It is true that all things
are pure, but woe to him who
eateth with offence."
Sta.Trpofrxofjifjia.TOG. ] With offence
to whom ? to himself, or to others?
If we say to himself, the words
will refer to the weak brother,
who is induced to eat from seeing
others eat ; and his conscience
being weak, is defiled ; an inter
pretation which agrees with ver.
14. and with the parallel passage
in 1 Cor. But the verses which
follow, have plainly a reference
to the offence given, not to a
man s own conscience, but to
others. We are therefore led to
take the words as equivalent to
iv a> o a^e\(f)6g aov TrpoffKOTrrei,
in ver. 21. The opposite view
might, however, be confirmed by
observing that the Apostle re
turns to the other side of the
subject in ver. 23.
21. It is good not to eat meat,
nor to drink wine, nor (to eat or
drink) anything whereby thy
brother stumbleth, or is entan
gled, or made weak.
The Apostle is using the ex
pression to eat meat, or to drink
wine generally, neither with par
ticular reference to any customs
of Nazarites or Essenes, nor to
luxurious and dainty fare. He
merely means " It is good not to
eat or drink anything whatever
that will give offence to our bre
thren."
iv w is best explained by the
repetition of fyayeiv and iritiv.
22. Of the two readings, <
TTiffnv x te > with an interrogative,
trv iriffriv jf}v ex^e, without an
interrogative, the latter has the
greater MS. authority, the former
is more like St. Paul. Hast
382
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[dr. XIV.
CVtoTTlOV TOV
a> So/a/xaei 6
OVK e/c 7ricrrea>s
Oeov.
ZOLVTOV
lav
Acara/ce/cpirat, on 23
Se o OVK IK moreo)?, d/xaprta
thou faith, keep it to thyself.
" Blessed is he who judgeth not
himself in that which he allow-
eth." It is a happy thing not to
have a scrupulous conscience. I
admit your superiority, I am not
saying that you are not better
than he. Only keep it to your
self and the presence of God.
Compare 1 Cor. xiv. 28., eavrw
3e XaXeirw KO.I ru> -9c.
23. The Apostle adds a reason
for the stronger respecting the
scruples of the weaker. But
the case of the weaker brother
is very different, he is con
demned if he doubts, because
doubt is inconsistent with faith,
and whatever is not of faith
is sin.
It has been often remarked
that St. Paul s conception of sin
is inseparable from the conscious
ness of sin. A trace of the same
thought occurs in the present
passage. He who is not confident
of what is right has not faith, and
is therefore a sinner. As above,
VER. 23.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
383
have to thyself 1 before God. Happy is he that con-
demneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.
23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he
eateth not of faith : for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
i Hast thou faith ? Have it to thyself.
faith delivered men from the law
of sin and death ; so here, where
the sense of sin is, faith is want
ing, and sin reassumes its former
power. The law in one of its
many forms returns, saying, not
"thou shalt not covet," but "thou
shalt not eat meats offered to
idols ;" introducing doubt and
perplexity into the soul. That
which makes sin to be what it is
is the law ; what in this parti
cular instance makes the thing
wrong, is the sense that it is so.
As above, the law and faith were
opposed, and the law was re
garded as almost sin ; so here,
sin and faith are the antagonists.
See Essay on the Law as the
Strength of Sin.
For the doxology which in
some MS. occurs in this place,
see the end of the Epistle.
381: EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS
CASUISTRY.
RELIGION and morality seem often to become entangled in circum
stances. The truth which came, not "to bring peace upon earth,
but a sword," could not but give rise to many new and conflicting
obligations. The kingdom of God had to adjust itself with the
kingdoms of this world ; though " the children were free," they could
not escape the fulfilment of duties to their Jewish or Roman gover
nors ; in the bosom of a family there were duties too ; in society
there were many points of contact with the heathen. A new element
of complexity had been introduced in all the relations between man
and man, giving rise to many new questions, which might be termed,
in the phraseology of modern times, " cases of conscience."
Of these the one which most frequently recurs in the Epistles of
St. Paul, is the question respecting meats and drinks, which appears
to have agitated both the Roman and Corinthian Churches, as well as
those of Jerusalem and Antioch, and probably, in a greater or less
degree, every other Christian community in the days of the Apostle.
The scruple which gave birth to it was not confined to Christianity ;
it was Eastern rather than Christian, and originated in a feeling
into which entered, not only Oriental notions of physical purity and
impurity, but also those of caste and of race. With other Eastern
influences it spread towards the West, in the flux of all religions,
exercising a peculiar power on the susceptible temper of mankind.
The same tendency exhibited itself in various forms. In one form
it was the scruple of those who ate herbs, while others " had faith "
to eat any thing. The Essenes and Therapeutse among the Jews,
and the Pythagoreans in the heathen world, had a similar feeling
respecting the use of animal food. It was a natural association
which led to such an abstinence. In the East, ever ready to connect,
CASUISTRY. 385
or rather incapable of separating, ideas of moral and physical im
purity, where the heat of the climate rendered animal food unne
cessary, if not positively unhealthful ; where corruption rapidly in
fected dead organised matter ; where, lastly, ancient tradition and
ceremonies told of the sacredness of animals and the mysteriousness
of animal life, nature and religion alike seemed to teach the same
losson, it was safer to abstain. It was the manner of such a
scruple to propagate itself. He who revolted at animal food could
not quietly sit by and see his neighbour partake of it. The cere
monialism of the age was the tradition of thousands of years, and
passed by a sort of contagion from one race to another, from Pagan
ism or Judaism to Christianity. How to deal with this " second
nature " was a practical difficulty among the first Christians. The
Gospel was not a gospel according to the Essenes, and the church
could not exclude those who held the scruples, neither could it
be narrowed to them ; it would not pass judgment on them at all.
Hence the force of the Apostle s words : " Him that is weak in the
faith receive, not to the decision of his doubts."
There was another point in reference to which the same spirit of
ceremonialism propagated itself, viz. meats offered to idols. Even
if meat in general were innocent and a creature of God, it could
hardly be a matter of indifference to partake of that which had been
" sacrificed to devils ; " least of all, to sit at meat in the idol s
temple. True, the idol was " nothing in the world " a block of
stone, to which the words good or evil were misapplied ; " a graven
image " which the workman made, " putting his hand to the hammer,"
as the old prophets described in their irony. And such is the
Apostle s own feeling, 1 Cor. viii. 4., x. 19. But he has also the
other feeling which he himself regards as not less true (1 Cor. x.
20.), and which was more natural to the mind of the first believers.
When they saw the worshippers of the idol revelling in impurity,
they could not but suppose that a spirit of some kind was there.
Their M^rfare, as the Apostle had told them, was not " against
VOL. II. C C
336 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against
the rulers of the darkness of this world." Evil angels were among
them ; where would they more naturally take up their abode than
around the altars and in the temples of the heathen ? And
if they had been completely free from superstition, and could have
regarded the heathen religions which they saw enthroned over the
world simply with contempt, still the question would have arisen,
What connexion were they to have with them and with their wor
shippers ? a question not easy to be answered in the bustle of Rome
and Corinth, where every circumstance of daily life, every amuse
ment, every political and legal right, was in some way bound up
with the heathen religions. Were they to go out of the world ? if
not, what was to be their relation to those without? It was a
branch of this more general question, the beginning of the difficulty
so strongly felt and so vehemently disputed about in the days of
Tertullian, which St. Paul discusses in reference to meats offered to
idols. Where was the line to be drawn ? Were they to visit the
idol s temple ; to sacrifice like other men to Diana or Jupiter ? That
could hardly be consistent with their Christian profession. But
granting this, where were they to stop ? Was it lawful to eat
meats offered to idols ? But if not, then how careful should they
be to discover what was offered to idols ? How easily might they
fall into sin unawares ? The scruple once indulged would soon
gather strength, until the very provision of their daily food would
become difficult by their disuse of the markets of the heathen.
A third instance of the same ceremonialism so natural to that age,
and to ourselves so strange and unmeaning, is illustrated by the
words of the Jerusalem Christians to the Apostle, " Thou wentest
in unto men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them ; " a scruple so
strong that, probably, St. Peter himself was never entirely free from
it, and at any rate yielded to the fear of it in others when withstood
by St. Paul at Antioch. This scruple may be said in one sense to
be hardly capable of an explanation, and in another not to need one.
For, probably, nothing can give our minds any conception of the
CASUISTRY. 387
nature of the feeling, the intense hold which it exercised, the con
centration which it was of every national and religious prejudice,
the constraint which was required to get rid of it as a sort of
" horror naturalis " in the minds of Jews ; while, on the other hand,
feelings at the present day not very dissimilar exist, not only in
Eastern countries, but among ourselves. There is nothing strange
in human nature being liable to them, or in their long lingering and
often returning, even when reason and charity alike condemn them.
We ourselves are not insensible to differences of race and colour, and
may therefore be able partially to comprehend (allowing for the
difference of East and West) what was the feeling of Jews and
Jewish Christians towards men uncircumcised.
On the last point St. Paul maintains but one language : "In
Christ Jesus there is neither circumcision nor uncircumcision." No
compromise could be allowed here, without destroying the Gospel
that he preached. But the other question of meats and drinks, when
separated from that of circumcision, admitted of various answers
and points of view. Accordingly there is an appearance of incon
sistency in the modes in which the Apostle resolves it. All these
modes have a use and interest for ourselves ; though our difficulties
are not the same as those of the early Christians, the words speak to
us, so long as prudence, and faith, and charity are the guides of
Christian life. It is characteristic of the Apostle that his answers
run into one another, as though each of them to different individuals,
and all in their turn, might present the solution of the difficulty.
Separating them under different heads, we may begin with 1 Cor.
x. 25., which may be termed the rule of Christian prudence :
" Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question
for conscience sake." That is to say : " Buy food as other men
do ; perhaps what you purchase has come from the idol s temple,
perhaps not. Do not encourage your conscience in raising scruples,
life will become impossible if you do. One question involves an
other and another and another without end. The manly and the
Christian way is to cut them short ; both as tending to weaken the
c c 2
388 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
character and as inconsistent with the very nature of spiritual
religion."
So we may venture to amplify the Apostle s precept, which
breathes the same spirit of moderation as his decisions respecting
celibacy and marriage. Among ourselves the remark is often made
that "extremes are practically untrue." This is another way of
putting the same lesson : If I may not sit in the idol s temple, it
may be plausibly argued, neither may I eat meats offered to idols ;
and if I may not eat meats offered to idols, then it logically follows
that I ought not to go into the market where idols meat is sold.
The Apostle snaps the chain of this misapplied logic : there must be
a limit somewhere ; we must not push consistency where it is prac
tically impossible. A trifling scruple is raised to the level of a
religious duty, and another and another, until religion is made up
of scruples, and the light of life fades, and the ways of life narrow
themselves.
It is not hard to translate the Apostle s precept into the language
of our time. Instances occur in politics, in theology, in our ordinary
occupations, in which beyond a certain point consistency is impos
sible. Take for example the following : A person feels that he
would be wrong in carrying on his business, or going to public
amusements, on a Sunday. He says: If it be wrong for me to
work, it is wrong to make the servants in my house work ; or if it
be wrong to go to public amusements, it is wrong to enjoy the re
creation of walking on a Sunday. So it may be argued that, because
slavery is wrong, therefore it is not right to purchase the produce
of slavery, or that of which the produce of slavery is a part, and so on
without end, until we are forced out of the world from a remote
fear of contagion with evil. Or I am engaged in a business which
may be in some degree deleterious to the health or injurious to the
morals of those employed in it, or I trade in some articles of com
merce which are unwholesome or dangerous, or I let a house or a
ship to another whose employment is of this description. Number
less questions of the same kind relating to the profession of a clergy-
CASUISTRY. 389
man, an advocate, or a soldier, have been pursued into endless con
sequences. Is the mind of any person so nicely balanced that " every
one of six hundred disputed propositions " is the representative of
his exact belief? or can every word in a set form of prayer at all
times reflect the feeling of those who read or follow it ? There is no
society to which we can belong, no common act of business or
worship in which two or three are joined together, in which such
difficulties are not liable to arise. Three editors conduct a news
paper, can it express equally the conviction of all the three ? Three
lawyers sign an opinion in common, is it the judgment of all or of
one or two of them? High-minded men have often got themselves
into a false position by regarding these questions in too abstract a
way. The words of the Apostle are a practical answer to them which
may be paraphrased thus : " Do as other men do in a Christian
country," Conscience will say, " He who is guilty of the least, is
guilty of all." In the Apostle s language it then becomes "the
strength of sin," encouraging us to despair of all, because in that
mixed condition of life in which God has placed us we cannot fulfil
all.
In accordance with the spirit of the same principle of doing as
other men do, the Apostle further implies that believers are to
accept the hospitality of the heathen. (1 Cor. x. 27.) But here
a modification comes in, which may be termed the law of Chris
tian charity or courtesy: Avoid giving offence, or, as we might
say, " Do not defy opinion." Eat what is set before you ; but if
a person sitting at meat pointedly says to you, " This was offered
to idols," do not eat. " All things are lawful, but all things are not
expedient," and this is one of the not expedient class. There ap
pears to be a sort of inconsistency in this advice, as there must
always be inconsistency in the rules of practical life which are
relative to circumstances. It might be said : " We cannot do one
thing at one time, and another thing at another ; now be guided by
another man s conscience, now by our own." It might be retorted,
" Is not this the dissimulation which you blame in St. Peter ? " To
c c 3
390 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
which it may be answered in turn : " But a man may do one thing
at one time, another thing at another time, becoming to the Jews a
Jew, if he do it in such a manner as to avoid the risk of miscon
struction." And this again admits of a retort. " Is it possible to
avoid misconstruction ? Is it not better to dare to be ourselves, to
act like ourselves, to speak like ourselves, to think like ourselves ? "
We seem to have lighted unawares on two varieties of human dispo
sition ; the one harmonising and adapting itself to the perplexities of
life, the other rebelling against them, and seeking to disentangle itself
from them. Which side of this argument shall we take ; neither
or both ? The Apostle appears to take both sides ; for in the abrupt
transition that follows, he immediately adds, " Why is my liberty to
be judged of another man s conscience ? what right has another
man to attack me for what I do in the innocence of my heart ? " It
is good advice to say, " Regard the opinions of others ; " and equally
good advice to say, " Do not regard the opinions of others." We
must balance between the two ; and over all, adjusting the scales, is
the law of Christian love.
Both in 1 Cor. viii. and Rom. xiv. the Apostle adds another prin
ciple, which may be termed the law of individual conscience, which
we must listen to in ourselves and regard in others. "He that
doubteth is damned ; whatsoever is not of faith is sin." All things
are lawful to him who feels them to be lawful, but the conscience
may be polluted by the most indifferent things. When we eat, we
should remember that the consequence of following our example
may be serious to others. For not only may our brother be offended
at us, but also by our example be drawn into sin; that is, to do
what, though indifferent in itself, is sin to him. And so the weak
brother, for whom Christ died, may perish through our fault ; that
is, he may lose his peace and harmony of soul and conscience -void
of offence, and all through our heedlessness in doing some unne
cessary thing, which were far better left undone.
Cases may be readily imagined, in which, like the preceding, the
rule of conduct here laid down by the Apostle would involve dis-
CASUISTRY. 391
simulation. So many thousand scruples and opinions as there are
in the world, we should have " to go out of the world " to fulfil it
honestly. All reserve, it may be argued, tends to break up the
confidence between man and man ; and there are times in which
concealment of our opinions, even respecting things indifferent,
would be treacherous and mischievous ; there are times, too, in
which things cease to be indifferent, and it is our duty to speak out
respecting the false importance which they have acquired. But,
after all qualifications of this kind have been made, the secondary
duty yet remains, of consideration for others, which should form an
element in our conduct. If truth is the first principle of our speech
and action, the good of others should, at any rate, be the second.
" If any man (not see thee who hast knowledge sitting in the idol s
temple, but) hear thee discoursing rashly of the Scriptures and the
doctrines of the Church, shall not the faith of thy younger brother
become confused? and his conscience being weak shall cease to
discern between good and evil. And so thy weak brother shall
perish for whom Christ died."
The Apostle adds a fourth principle, which may be termed the
law of Christian freedom, as the last solution of the difficulty :
" Therefore, whether ye eat or drink, do all to the glory of God."
From the perplexities of casuistry, and the conflicting rights of a
man s own conscience and that of another, he falls back on the
simple rule, " Whatever you do, sanctify the act." It cannot be said
that all contradictory obligations vanish the moment we try to act
with simplicity and truth ; we cannot change the current of life and
its circumstances by a wish or an intention ; we cannot dispel that
which is without, though we may clear that which is within. But
we have taken the first step, and are in the way to solve the riddle.
The insane scruple, the fixed idea, the ever-increasing doubt begins
to pass away ; the spirit of the child returns to us ; the mind is
again free, and the road of life open. " Whether ye eat or drink,
do all to the glory of God ;" that is, determine to seek only the will
of God, and you may have a larger measure of Christian liberty
c c 4
392 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
allowed to you ; things, perhaps wrong in others, may be right
for you.
The law, then, of Christian prudence, using that moderation
which we show in things pertaining to this life ; or the law of
Christian charity, resolving, and as it were absorbing, our scruples
in the love of other men ; or the law of the individual conscience,
making that right to a man in matters in themselves indifferent
which seems to be so ; or the law of freedom, giving us a spirit,
instead of a letter, and enlarging the first principles of the doctrine
of Christ ; or all together, shall furnish the doubting believer with
a sufficient rule of faith and conduct. Even the law of Christian
charity is a rule of freedom rather than of restraint, in proportion
as it places men above questions of meats and drinks, and enables
them to regard such disputes only by the light of love to God and
man. For there is a tyranny which even freedom may exercise,
when it makes us intolerant of other men s difficulties. " Where
the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty ; " but there is also a liberty
without the Spirit of the Lord. To eat with unwashen hands
defileth not a man ; but to denounce those who do, or do not do so,
may, in St. Paul s language, cause not only the weak brother, but
him that fancieth he standeth, to fall ; and so, in a false endeavour to
preach the Gospel of Christ, men " may perish for whom Christ died."
The general rule of the Apostle is, "Neither circumcision
availeth anything, nor uncircumcision ; " " neither if we eat not are
we the better, neither if we eat are we the worse." But then " all
things are lawful, but all things are not expedient," even in re
ference to ourselves, and still more as we are members one of ano-
other. There is a further counsel of prudence, " Receive such an
one, but not to the determination of his doubt." And lastly, as the
guide to the spirit of our actions, remember the words : " I will
eat no meat as long as the world standeth, lest I make my brother
to offend."
Questions of meats and drinks, of eating with washen or un-
CASUISTRY. 393
waslien hands, have passed from the stage of religious ordinances to
that of proprieties and decencies of life. Neither the purifications of
the law of Moses, nor the seven precepts of Noah, are any longer
binding upon Christians. Nature herself teaches all things neces
sary for health and comfort. But the spirit of casuistry in every
age finds fresh materials to. employ itself upon, laying hold of some
question of a new moon or a sabbath, some fragment of antiquity,
some inconsistency of custom, some subtilty of thought, some
nicety of morality, analysing and dividing the actions of daily
life ; separating the letter from the spirit, and words from things ;
winding its toils around the infirmities of the weak, and linking
itself to the sensibility of the intellect. Out of this labyrinth of
the soul the believer finds his way, by keeping his eye fixed on that
landmark which the Apostle himself has set up : " In Christ Jesus
neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a
new creature."
There is no one probably, of any religious experience, who has
not at times felt the power of a scrupulous conscience. In speaking
of a scrupulous conscience, the sense of remorse for greater offences
is not intended to be included. These may press more or less hea
vily on the soul ; and the remembrance of them may ingrain it
self, with different degrees of depth, on different temperaments ;
but whether deep or shallow, the sorrow for them cannot be
brought under the head of scruples of conscience. There are " many
things in which we offend all," about which there can be no mis
take, the impression of which on our minds it would be fatal to
weaken or do away. Nor is it to be denied that there may be customs
almost universal among us which are so plainly repugnant to mo
rality, that we can never be justified in acquiescing in them ;
or that individuals of clear head and strong will have been led on
by feelings which other men would deride as conscientious scruples
into an heroic struggle against evil. But quite independently of
real sorrows for sin, or real protests against evil, most religious
persons in the course of their lives have felt unreal scruples
394 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
or difficulties, or exaggerated real but slight ones ; they have
abridged their Christian freedom, and thereby their means of doing
good ; they have cherished imaginary obligations, and artificially
hedged themselves in a particular course of action. Honour and
truth have seemed to be at stake about trifles light as air, or conscience
has become a burden too heavy for them to bear in some doubtful
matter of conduct. Scruples of this kind are ever liable to in
crease : as one vanishes, another appears ; the circumstances of the
world and of the Church, and the complication of modern society,
have a tendency to create them. The very form in which they come
is of itself sufficient to put us on our guard against them ; for we
can give no account of them to ourselves ; they are seldom affected
by the opinion of others ; they are more often put down by the ex
ercise of authority than by reasoning or judgment. They gain hold on
the weaker sort of men, or on those not naturally weak, in moments
of weakness. They often run counter to our wish or interest, and for
this very reason acquire a kind of tenacity. They seem innocent,
mistakes, at worst, on the safe side, characteristic of the ingenuousness
of youth, or indicative of a heart uncorrupted by the world. But
this is not so. Creatures as we are of circumstances, we cannot
safely afford to give up things indifferent, means of usefulness, in
struments of happiness to ourselves, which may affect our lives and
those of our children to the latest posterity. There are few greater
dangers in religion than the indulgence of such scruples, the conse
quences of which can rarely be seen until too late, and which affect the
moral character of a man at least as much as his temporal interests.
Strange as it may appear, it is nevertheless true, that scruples
about lesser matters almost always involve some dereliction of duty
in greater and more obvious ones. A tender conscience is a con
science unequal to the struggles of life. At first sight it seems as if,
when lesser duties were cared for, the greater would take care of
themselves. But this is not the lesson which experience teaches.
In our moral as in our physical nature, we are finite beings, capable
only of a certain degree of tension, ever liable to suffer disorder
CASUISTRY. 395
and derangement, to be over-exercised in one part and weakened
in another. No one can fix his mind intently on a trifling scruple
or become absorbed in an eccentric fancy, without finding the great
principles of truth and justice insensibly depart from him. He has
been looking through a microscope at life, and cannot take in its
general scope. The moral proportions of things are lost to him ;
the question of a new moon or a Sabbath has taken the place of
diligence or of honesty. There is no limit to the illusions which he
may practice on himself. There are those, all whose interests and
prejudices at once take the form of duties and scruples, partly from
dishonesty, but also from weakness, and because that is the form in
which they can with the best grace maintain them against other men,
and conceal their true nature from themselves.
Scruples are dangerous in another way, as they tend to drive men
into a corner in which the performance of our duty becomes so
difficult as to be almost impossible. A virtuous and religious life
does not consist merely in abstaining from evil, but in doing what is
good. It has to find opportunities and occasions for itself, without
which it languishes. A man has a scruple about the choice of a pro
fession ; as a Christian, he believes war to be unlawful ; in familiar
language, he has doubts respecting orders, difficulties about the law.
Even the ordinary ways of conducting trade appear deficient to his
nicer sense of honesty ; or perhaps he has already entered on one of
these lines of life, and finds it necessary to quit it. At last, there
comes the difficulty of " how he is to live." There cannot be a
greater mistake than to suppose that a good resolution is sufficient in
such a case to carry a man through a long life.
But even if we suppose the case of one who is endowed with every
earthly good and instrument of prosperity, who can afford, as is
sometimes said, to trifle with the opportunities of life, still the
mental consequences will be hardly less injurious to him. For he
who feels scruples about the ordinary enjoyments and occupations of
his fellows, does so far cut himself off from his common nature.
He is an isolated being, incapable of acting with his fellow-men.
396 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
There are plants which, though the sun shine upon them, and the
dews water them, peak and pine from some internal disorder, and
appear to have no sympathy with the influences around them. So
is the mind corroded by scruples of conscience. It cannot expand
to sun or shower ; it belongs not to the world of light ; it has no in
telligence of or harmony with mankind around. It is insensible to
the great truth, that though we may not do evil that good may come,
yet that good and evil, truth and falsehood, are bound together on
earth, and that we cannot separate ourselves from them.
It is one of the peculiar dangers of scruples of conscience, that the
consequence of giving way to them is never felt at the time that
they press upon us. When the mind is worried by a thought secretly
working in it, and its trial becomes greater than it can bear, it is
eager to take the plunge in life that may put it out of its misery ;
to throw aside a profession it may be, or to enter a new religious
communion. We shall not be wrong in promising ourselves a few
weeks of peace and placid enjoyment. The years that are to follow
we are incapable of realising ; whether the weary spirit will require
some fresh pasture, will invent for itself some new doubt ; whether
its change is a return to nature or not, it is impossible for us to
anticipate. Whether it has in itself that hidden strength which,
under every change of circumstances, is capable of bearing up, is a
question which we are the least able to determine for ourselves.
In general we may observe, that the weakest minds, and those least
capable of enduring such consequences, are the most likely to indulge
the scruples. We know beforehand the passionate character, hidden
often under the mask of reserve, the active yet half-reasoning intel
lect, which falls under the power of such illusions.
In the Apostolic Church "cases of conscience" arose out of reli
gious traditions, and what may be termed the ceremonial cast of the
age ; in modern times the most frequent source of them may be said
to be the desire of logical or practical consistency, such as is irre
concilable with the mixed state of human affairs and the feebleness
of the human intellect. There is no lever like the argument from
CASUISTRY. 397
consistency, with which to bring men over to our opinions. A par
ticular system or view, Calvinism perhaps, or Catholicism, has taken
possession of the mind. Shall we stop short of pushing its premises
to their conclusions ? Shall we stand in the midway, where we are
liable to be overridden by the combatants on either side in the
struggle? Shall we place ourselves between our reason and our
affections; between our practical duties and our intellectual con
victions ? Logic would have us go forward, and take our stand at
the most advanced point we are there already, it is urged, if we
were true to ourselves, but feeling, and habit, and common sense
bid us stay where we are, unable to give an account of ourselves,
yet convinced that we are right. We may listen to the one voice,
we may listen also to the other. The true way of guiding either is
to acknowledge both ; to use them for a time against each other,
until experience of life and of ourselves has taught us to harmonise
them in a single principle.
So, again, in daily life cases often occur, in which we must do as
other men do, and act upon a general understanding, even though
unable to reconcile a particular practice to the letter of truthfulness
or even to our individual conscience. It is hard in such cases to lay
down a definite rule. But in general we should be suspicious of any
conscientious scruples in which other good men do not share. We
shall do right to make a large allowance for the perplexities and
entanglements of human things ; we shall observe that persons of
strong mind and will brush away our scruples ; we shall consider that
not he who has most, but he who has fewest scruples approaches
most nearly the true Christian. The man whom we emphatically
call " honest," " able," " upright," who is a religious as well as a
sensible man, seems to have no room for them ; from which we are
led to infer that such scruples are seldom in the nature of things
themselves, but arise out of some peculiarity or eccentricity in those
who indulge them. That they are often akin to madness, is an
observation not without instruction even to those whom God has
blest with the full use of reason.
398 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
So far we arrive at a general conclusion like St. Paul s :
"Whether ye eat or drink, do all to the glory of God;" and,
" Blessed is he who condemneth not himself in that which he allow-
eth." " Have the Spirit of truth, and the truth shall make you
free;" and the entanglements of words and the perplexities of
action will disappear. But there is another way in which such dif
ficulties have been resolved, which meets them in detail ; viz., the
practice of confession and the rules of casuistry, which are the
guides of the confessor. When the spirit is ^disordered within us,
it may be urged that we ought to go out of ourselves, and confess
our sins one to another. But he who leads, and he who is led, alike
require some rules for the examination of conscience, to quicken or
moderate the sense of sin, to assist experience, to show men to them
selves as they really are, neither better nor worse. Hence the ne
cessity for casuistry.
It is remarkable, that what is in idea so excellent that it may be
almost described in St. Paul s language as " holy, just, and good,"
should have become a by -word among mankind for hypocrisy and
dishonesty. In popular estimation, no one is supposed to resort to
casuistry, but with the view of evading a duty. The moral instincts
of the world have risen up and condemned it. It is fairly put
down by the universal voice, and shut up in the darkness of the
tomes of the casuists. A kind of rude justice has been done upon
the system, as in most cases of popular indignation, probably with
some degree of injustice to the individuals who were its authors.
Yet, hated as casuistry has deservedly been, it is fair also to admit
that it has an element of truth which was the source of its influence.
This element of truth is the acknowledgment of the difficulties
which arise in the relations of a professing Christian world to the
church and to Christianity. How, without lowering the Gospel, to
place it on a level with daily life is a hard question. It will be
proper for us to consider the system from both sides in its origin
and in its perversion. Why it existed, and why it has failed, furnish
a lesson in the history of the human mind of great interest and im
portance.
CASUISTRY. 399
The unseen power by which the systems of the casuists were
brought into being, was the necessity of the Roman Catholic Church.
Like the allegorical interpretation of Scripture, they formed a link
between the present and the past. At the time of the Reformation
the doctrines of the ancient, no less than of the Reformed, faith
awakened into life. But they required to be put in a new form,
to reconcile them to the moral sense of mankind. Luther ended the
work of self-examination by casting all his sins on Christ. But the
casuists could not thus meet the awakening of men s consciences and
the fearful looking for of judgment. They had to deal with an altered
world, in which nevertheless the spectres of the past, purgatory, pe
nance, mortal sin, were again rising up ; hallowed as they were by
authority and antiquity they could not be cast aside ; the preacher of
the Counter-reformation could only explain them away. If he had
placed distinctly before men s eyes, that for some one act of immora
lity or dishonesty they were in a state of mortal sin, the heart true
to itself would have recoiled from such a doctrine, and the connex
ion between the Church and the world would have been for ever
severed. And yet the doctrine was a part of ecclesiastical tradition ;
it could not be held, it could not be given up. The Jesuits escaped
the dilemma by holding and evading it.
So far it would not be untrue to say that casuistry had originated
in an effort to reconcile the Roman Catholic faith with nature and
experience. The Roman system was, if strictly carried out, horrible
and impossible ; a doctrine not, as it has been sometimes described, of
salvation made easy, but of universal condemnation. From these
fearful conclusions of logic the subtilty of the human intellect was
now to save it. The analogy of law, as worked out by jurists and
canonists, supplied the means. What was repugnant to human jus
tice could not be agreeable to Divine. The scholastic philosophy,
which had begun to die out and fade away before the light of clas
sical learning, was to revive in a new form, no longer hovering
between heaven and earth, out of the reach of experience, yet below
the region of spiritual truth, but, as it seemed, firmly based in the life
400 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
and actions of mankind. It was the same sort of wisdom which de
fined the numbers and order of the celestial hierarchy, which was
now to be adapted to the infinite modifications of which the actions
of men are capable.
It is obvious that there are endless points of view in which the
simplest duties may be regarded. Common sense says, "A
man is to be judged by his acts," "there can be no mistake about
a lie," and so on. The casuists proceed by a different road. Fixing
the mind, not on the simplicity, but on the intricacy of human action,
they study every point of view, and introduce every conceivable dis
tinction. A first most obvious distinction is that of the intention
and the act : ought the one to be separated from the other ? The
law itself seems to teach that this may hardly be ; rather the inten
tion is held to be that which gives form and colour to the act. Then
the act by itself is nothing, and the intention by itself almost inno
cent. As we play between the two different points of view, the act
and the intention together evanesce. But, secondly, as we con
sider the intention, must we not also consider the circumstances of
the agent ? For plainly a being deprived of free will cannot be re
sponsible for his actions. Place the murderer in thought under the
conditions of a necessary agent, and his actions are innocent ; or
under an imperfect necessity, and he loses half his guilt. Or sup
pose a man ignorant, or partly ignorant, of what is the teaching of
the Church, or the law of the land, here another abstract point of
view arises, leading us out of the region of common sense to difficult
and equitable considerations, which may be determined fairly, but
which we have the greatest motive to decide in favour of ourselves.
Or again, try to conceive an act without reference to its conse
quences, or in reference to some single consequence, without regard
ing it as a violation of morality or of nature, or in reference solely
to the individual conscience. Or imagine the will half consenting
to, half withdrawing from its act ; or acting by another, or in
obedience to another, or with some good object, or under the
influence of some imperfect obligation, or of opposite obligations.
CASUISTRY. 401
Even conscience itself may be at last played off against the plainest
truths.
By the aid of such distinctions the simplest principles of morality
multiply to infinity. An instrument has been introduced of such
subtilty and elasticity that it can accommodate the canons of the
Church to any consciences, to any state of the world. Sin need no
longer be confined to the dreadful distinction of mortal and venial
sin ; it has lost its infinite and mysterious character ; it has become
a thing of degrees, to be aggravated or mitigated in idea, according
to the expediency of the case or the pliability of the confessor. It
seems difficult to perpetrate a perfect sin. No man need die of
despair ; in some page of the writings of the casuists will be found a
difference suited to his case. And this without in any degree inter
fering with a single doctrine of the Church, or withdrawing one of
its anathemas against heresy.
The system of casuistry, destined to work such great results, in
reconciling the Church to the world and to human nature, like a
torn web needing to be knit together, may be regarded as a science
or profession. It is a classification of human actions, made in one
sense without any reference to practice. For nothing was further from
the mind of the casuist than to inquire whether a particular distinc
tion would have a good or bad effect, was liable to perversion or not.
His object was only to make such distinctions as the human mind was
capable of perceiving and acknowledging. As to the physiologist
objects in themselves loathsome and disgusting may be of the deepest
interest, so to the casuist the foulest and most loathsome vices of
mankind are not matters of abhorrence, but of science, to be arranged
and classified, just like any other varieties of human action. It is
true that the study of the teacher was not supposed to be also open
to the penitent. But it inevitably followed that the spirit of the
teacher communicated itself to the taught. He could impart no high
or exalted idea of morality or religion, who was measuring it out by
inches, not deepening men s idea of sin, but attenuating it ; " mincing
into nonsense " the first principles of right and wrong.
VOL. II. D D
402 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
The science was further complicated by the " doctrine of pro
bability," which consisted in making anything approved or approv-
able that was confirmed by authority ; even, as was said by some,
of a single casuist. That could not be very wrong which a wise
and good man had once thought to be right, a better than ourselves
perhaps, surveying the circumstances calmly and impartially. Who
would wish that the rule of his daily life should go beyond that of a
saint and doctor of the Church ? Who would require such a rule to
be observed by another ? Who would refuse another such an escape
out of the labyrinth of human difficulties and perplexities ? As in
all the Jesuit distinctions, there was a kind of reasonableness in the
theory of this ; it did but go on the principle of cutting short scruples
by the rule of common sense.
And yet, what a door was here opened for the dishonesty of man
kind ! The science itself had dissected moral action until nothing
of life or meaning remained in it. It had thrown aside, at the same
time, the natural restraint which the moral sense itself exercises in
determining such questions. And now for the application of this
system, so difficult and complicated in itself, so incapable of receiving
any check from the opinions of mankind, the authority not of the
Church, but of individuals, was to be added as a new lever to over
throw the last remains of natural religion and morality.
The marvels of this science are not yet ended. For the same
changes admit of being rung upon speech as well as upon action, until
truth and falsehood become alike impossible. Language itself dis
solves before the decomposing power ; oaths, like actions, vanish into
air when separated from the intention of the speaker ; the shield of
custom protects falsehood. It would be a curious though needless
task to follow the subject into further details. He who has read one
page of the casuists has read all. There is nothing that is not
right in some particular point of view, nothing that is not true
under some previous supposition.
Such a system may be left to refute itself. Those who have
strayed so far away from truth and virtue are self-condemned. Yet
CASUISTRY. 403
it is not without interest to trace, by what false lights of philosophy
or religion, good men revolting themselves at the commission of evil
were led, step by step, to the unnatural result. We should expect
to find that such a result originated not in any settled determination
to corrupt the morals of mankind, but in an intellectual error ; and
it is suggestive of strange thoughts respecting our moral nature, that
an intellectual error should have had the power to produce such con
sequences. Such appears to have been the fact. The conception of
moral action on which the system depends, is as erroneous and im
perfect as that of the scholastic philosophy respecting the nature of
ideas. The immediate reduction of the error to practice through
the agency of an order made the evil greater than that of other
intellectual errors on moral and religious subjects, which, spring
ing up in the brain of an individual, are often corrected and puri
fied in the course of nature before they find their way into the
common mind.
1. Casuistry ignores the difference between thought and action.
Actions arc necessarily external. The spoken word constitutes the
lie ; the outward performance the crime. The Highest Wisdom, it is
true, has identified the two : " Pie that looketh on a woman to lust
after her hath already committed adultery with her in his heart."
But this is not the rule by which we are to judge our past actions,
but to guard our future ones. He who has thoughts of lust or passion
is not innocent in the sight of God, and is liable to be carried on to
perform the act on which he suffers himself to dwell. And, in looking
forward, he will do well to remember this caution of Christ ; but in
looking backward, in thinking of others, in endeavouring to esti
mate the actual amount of guilt or trespass, if he begins by placing
thought on the level of action, he will end by placing action on the
level of thought. It would be a monstrous state of mind in which
we regarded mere imagination of evil as the same with action ;
hatred as the same with murder; thoughts of impurity as the same
with adultery. It is not so that we must learn Christ. Actions are
one thing and thoughts another in the eye of conscience, no less than
404 EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
of the law of the land ; of God as well as man. However important
it may be to remember that the all-seeing eye of God tries the reins,
it is no less important to remember also that morality consists in
definite acts, capable of being seen and judged of by our fellow-
creatures, impossible to escape ourselves.
2. What may be termed the frame of casuistry was supplied by
law, while the spirit is that of the scholastic philosophy. Neither
afforded any general principle which might correct extravagancies
in detail, or banish subtilties, or negative remote and unsafe in
ferences. But the application of the analogy of law to subjects of
morality and religion was itself a figment which, at every step, led
deeper into error. The object was to realise and define, in every
possible stage, acts which did not admit of legal definition, either
because they were not external, but only thoughts or suggestions
of the mind, or because the external part of the action was not
allowed to be regarded separately from the motives of the agent.
The motive or intention which law takes no account of except
as indicating the nature of the act, becomes the principal subject
of the casuist s art. Casuistry may be said to begin where law
ends. It goes where law refuses to follow with legal rules and
distinctions into the domain of morality. It weighs in the balance
of precedent and authority the impalpable acts of a spiritual being.
Law is a real science which has its roots in history, which grasps
fact ; seeking, in idea, to rest justice on truth only, and to reconcile
the rights of individuals with the well-being of the whole. But
casuistry is but the ghost or ape of a science ; it has no history and
no facts corresponding to it ; it came into the world by the ingenuity
of man ; its object is to produce an artificial disposition of human
affairs, at which nature rebels.
3. The distinctions of the casuist are far from equalling the subtilty
of human life, or the diversity of its conditions. It is quite true
that actions the same in name are, in the scale of right and wrong,
as different as can be imagined; varying with the age, tempera
ment, education, circumstances of each individual. The casuist is
CASUISTRY. 405
not in fault for maintaining this difference, but for supposing that
he can classify or distinguish them so as to give any conception
of their innumerable shades and gradations. All his folios are
but the weary effort to abstract or make a brief of the individuality
of man. The very actions which he classifies change their mean
ing as he writes them down, like the words of a sentence torn
away from their context. He is ever idealizing and creating dis
tinctions, splitting straws, dividing hairs ; yet any one who re
flects on himself will idealize and distinguish further still, and think
of his whole life in all its circumstances, with its sequence of
thoughts and motives, and, withal, many excuses. But no one can
extend this sort of idealism beyond himself; no insight of the
confessor can make him clairvoyant of the penitent s soul. Know
ourselves we sometimes truly may, but we cannot know others, and
no other can know us. No other can know or understand us in the
same wonderful or mysterious way ; no other can be conscious of
the spirit in which we have lived ; no other can see us as a whole
or get within. God has placed a veil of flesh between ourselves and
other men, to screen the nakedness of our soul. Into the secret
chamber He does not require that we should admit any other judge
or counsellor but Himself. Two eyes only are upon us, the eye
of our own soul the eye of God, and the one is the light of the
other. That is the true light, on the which if a man look he will
have a knowledge of himself, different in kind from that which the
confessor extracts from the books of the casuists.
4. There are many cases in which our first thoughts, or, to speak
more correctly, our instinctive perceptions, are true and right ; in
which it is not too much to say, that he who deliberates is lost.
The very act of turning to a book, or referring to another, enfeebles
our power of action. Works of art are produced we know not how,
by some simultaneous movement of hand and thought, which seem
to lend to each other force and meaning. So in moral action, the true
view does not separate the intention from the act, or the act from the
circumstances which surround it, but regards them as one and abso-
D D 3
406 EPISTLE TO THE HOMANS.
lutely indivisible. In the performance of the act and in the judgment
of it, the will and the execution, the hand and the thought are to be
considered as one. Those who act most energetically, who in difficult
circumstances judge the most truly, do not separately pass in review
the rules, and principles, and counter principles of action, but grasp
them at once, in a single instant. Those who act most truthfully,
honestly, firmly, manfully, consistently, take least time to deliberate.
Such should be the attitude of our minds in all questions of right
and wrong, truth and falsehood : we may not inquire, but act.
5. Casuistry not only renders us independent of our own convic
tions, it renders us independent also of the opinion of mankind in
general. It puts the confessor in the place of ourselves, and in the
place of the world. By making the actions of men matters of sci
ence, it cuts away the supports and safeguards which public opinion
gives to morality ; the confessor in the silence of the closet easily
introduces principles from which the common sense or conscience of
mankind would have shrunk back. Especially in matters of truth
and falsehood, in the nice sense of honour shown in the unwilling
ness to get others within our power, his standard will probably
fall short of that of the world at large. Public opinion, it is true,
drives men s vices inwards ; it teaches them to conceal their faults
from others, and if possible from themselves, and this very conceal
ment may sink them in despair, or cover them with self-deceit.
And the soul whose "house is its castle" has an enemy within,
the strength of which may be often increased by communications
from without. Yet the good of this privacy is on the whole
greater than the evil. Not only is the outward aspect of society
more decorous, and the confidence between man and man less liable
to be impaired ; the mere fact of men s sins being known to them
selves and God only, and the support afforded even by the unde
served opinion of their fellows, are of themselves great helps to a
moral and religious life. Many a one by being thought better than
he was has become better ; by being thought as bad or worse has
become worse. To communicate our sins to those who have no
CASUISTRY. 407
claim to know them is of itself a diminution of our moral strength.
It throws upon others what we ought to do for ourselves ; it leads
us to seek in the sympathy of others a strength which no sympathy
can give. It is a greater trust than is right for us commonly to
repose in our fellow-creatures ; it places us in their power ; it may
make us their tools.
To conclude, the errors and evils of casuistry may be summed up
as follows: It makes that abstract which is concrete, scientific which
is contingent, artificial which is natural, positive which is moral,
theoretical which is intuitive and immediate. It puts the parts in
the place of the whole, exceptions in the place of rules, system in
the place of experience, dependence in the place of responsibility,
reflection in the place of conscience. It lowers the heavenly to the
earthly, the principles of men to their practice, the tone of the
preacher to the standard of ordinary life. It sends us to another for
that which can only be found in ourselves. It leaves the highway
of public opinion to wander in the labyrinths of an imaginary sci
ence ; the light of the world for the darkness of the closet. It is to
human nature what anatomy is to our bodily frame ; instead of a
moral and spiritual being, preserving only " a body of death."
I) D 4
408
EPJSTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cii. XV.
Se ^ju-ets ol Svvarol ra ao-Oeprj^ara TUV a$v- 15
/3acrraew Kal JU,T) eavTois apeo-Keuv. e/cao-ros 1 2
TO) 7r\r)(riov apecrKTO) ets TO ayauov irpbs OLKOOO- 3
/cat yap 6 X/HCTTOS ov^ laurw ^pecre^, dXXa KaOoas
Ol oVeiSiay^ol rwz 6VeuH6Vr<wi> ere eTreVecra^
CTT e///e. ocra yap Trpoeypdcfrrj, ets TT)Z rjfJLerepav StSacnca- 4
Add 7cfy>.
The commencement of this
chapter is closely connected with
the preceding. " He who doubts
if he eats, is condemned." But
we who are strong and do not
doubt, ought to bear the weak
nesses of others. As Christ
pleased not himself, so neither
ought we to please ourselves.
The words of the prophets, which
speak of the reproaches that fell
on Him, may still instruct us.
They were written beforehand,
to teach us to be of one mind,
that we should receive others,
even as Christ received us. At
ver. 8. the argument takes a new
turn. While exhorting the Ro
man Church to unity, the other
subject of discord arises in the
Apostle s mind, not the disputes
of strong and weak about meats
and drinks, but the greater and
more general dispute about Jew
and Gentile, the old and the new,
the law and the Gospel. He re
turns upon the former theme,
and repeats language of reconci
liation, which he had used before.
Christ came not to destroy the
prophets, but to fulfil ; the mi
nister of the circumcision to the
uncircumcision ; the performer of
the promises made to the patri
archs to all mankind. The Gen
tiles and the Jews rejoice to
gether ; the root of Jesse is the
hope of both. The Apostle then
passes on to matters personal : an
apology for writing so boldly; his
intended journeys to Rome, Spain,
and Jerusalem ; the contribution
for the poor saints ; with the al
lusions to which, however, he
blends religious thoughts and
feelings.
5,] but we ought.
e is closely connected with the
preceding chapter. "And it is
our part to take upon ourselves
the infirmities of the weak, as
they may lead them into sin." ce.
expresses the practical result of
the former statement, viewed from
another aspect in reference to
ourselves.
The division of the chapters is
obviously unnatural. Yet that
of Lachmann is not much better,
who includes the first verse of
XV. in the previous chapter, and
thereby separates rw TrX^aioi in
the second verse, and lavrw in the
third, from tavro tQ in the first.
In a style like that of St. Paul,
in which the divisions of the
subject are irregular, the distri
bution into chapters of conve
nient length is necessarily arti
ficial, and often bears no relation
to the breaks in the sense.
Chapter and verse are only marks
in the margin to facilitate re
ference.
A better break occurs at ver.
8. and at ver. 14.
r/^ueTc ol t^uyaro/.J The Apo
stle identifies himself with the
VER. 1 -4.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
409
15 Now* we that are strong ought to bear the infirmi-
2 ties of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let every
one of us please his neighbour for his good to edi-
3 fication. For Christ too* pleased not himself; but, as
it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached
4 thee fell on me. For
whatsoever things were written
stronger party, to give force to
his words. As if he said :
" You and I, who are strong and
enlightened, should bear the in
firmities of others. My side is
that of the strong, not against
but for the weak ; we who are
whole should take care of those
who are sick." It is a stage of
the Gospel to know that "that
which goeth into a man defileth
not a man ; " it is a higher stage
to know it and not always to act
upon it. /3a0rdei , more precise
than 4>tpiv, as " to carry " is more
precise than " to bear." Compare
Gal. vi. 2., a\\ri\u)r TO. flapr] /3a-
ara^ETf.
KOI fjtf] eavrolg djoeoreiJ .J The
Apostle touches upon selfishness
as the root of these differences
with each other. Above he had
said " We are not our own, but
Christ s ; " in a similar strain he
continues, we ought not to please
ourselves, for Christ pleased not
himself.
elc TO ayadov, for good.~\ Of
which Ti-jooc otjcociojuj/i is a more
exact explanation ; " for good,
with a view to edifying." To
this interpretation it is objected
that olKolo^iiv should have had
the article, as well as dyafloj ,
and, therefore, that it is better to
give the words, dg TO ayaflor the
explanation, " touching the good."
The awkwardness of such a use
of eiQ, where a simpler construc
tion is possible, is a greater ob
jection to this mode of taking the
passage than can be urged against
the other, from the want of pa
rallelism in the clauses. TO dyu-
Q6v may have the article, either
as an adjective turned into a sub
stantive by the addition of the
article, or as implying a reference
to what has preceded, or to the
idea of good in the mind of the
person addressed.
Here, as elsewhere, ctfcodop/
is the practical principle which
is to determine questions and dis
putes. Comp. 1 Cor. xiv. 26. ;
2 Cor. x. 8.
3. For in doing this we are
but imitating the example of
Christ, who pleased not himself.
For ye know the grace of our
Lord Jesus Christ, that though
he was rich, yet for our sakes he
became poor. Comp. 2 Cor. viii.
9., and Phil. ii. 6. As was said
of him in Psalm Ixix. (in the
latter part of the ninth verse),
" The reproaches of them that
reproached thee, O God, are
fallen upon me." That is, Christ
pleased not himself, but endured
all the reproaches of the enemies
of God which were heaped upon
him. A similar application of
the former words of the same
verse to Christ is made in John
ii. 17., " The zeal of thy house
hath eaten me up."
oaa yap Trpotypdfyrjyfor whatso-
ever things were written afore
time. ] It is observable that in
quotations from the Old Testa
ment, St. Paul does not say " this
410
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cn. XV.
\iav lypdffrr) 1 , Iva Slot TT?S vTTOfJiovrjs Kal Sid 2 TT/S irapa-
TOJV ypa<j)Ct)i> TT]V IXirioa e^aj/xe^. 6 Se 0o<$ Trjs 5
Acai TT^S TrapaK\TJ<Tea)s our) ypJuv TO avTO <f)povelv
iv dXX^Xoi? KaTa yjpio~Tov Ir)o~ovv, iVa 6/xo^v/iaSo^ eV e^i 6
Sofd^re ro^ #eo*> Acai rraTtpa TOV Kvpiov r^^v
SLO 7rpoo~\ap./3dveo~d dXXi^Xou?, Ka0a)<$ 7
os TT^ocreXdySero u/xds 3 15 Sd^a^ roi) 4 ^eov.
ydp xpio~Tov SiaKovov yevecrOai TrepiTOfJi fjs vtrep s
4 Om. TOV. 5 5e. Add Irjo-ouV.
Kal 6
is the original meaning of these
words," but rather, " hence we
are to learn this lesson." " Doth
God take care for oxen ? or saith
he it altogether for our sakes ? "
] Cor. ix. 9, 10.
We may ask, "But did the
Apostle suppose that words like
these were intended to bear this
and no other meaning ? and that
they were understood in this
sense by their original authors ?"
The answer to these questions is
that the Apostle never asked
them. The last thought that
would have entered into his
mind, would have been what in
modern language we should term
the reproduction to himself of
the life and circumstances of the
writers. He read the Old Tes
tament, seeing " Christ in all
things, and all things in Christ."
4. cia rfJQ virofJLOvriG KCLL eta rijr
TrupaKXriffewQ TWV ypcKfi&v, through
patience and through comfort of
the Scriptures, ] may mean, either
" by the examples of patience
and consolation which the Scrip
tures afford ; " or rather, " by
patiently meditating and receiv
ing consolation from the Scrip
tures ; " the genitive case denot
ing, either origin, or a more
general idea of relation and con
nexion. Such words would de
scribe those who, like Simeon and
Anna, were waiting " for the
consolation of Israel," suggested
by the Psalms and the prophets.
The reading of Lachmann, who
inserts a second tci, has a con
siderable preponderance of MS.
authority in its favour. Internal
evidence is on the other side, as
the connexion of the verses pre
ceding and following shows that
i] as well as TrapaK\r}<ng is
to be joined with TWV ypafyuv.
The insertion of &a is, therefore,
unnecessary and rather awkward.
5. But when I speak of pa
tience and consolation, I would
add a prayer that God, who is
tho author of every good and
perfect gift, and of those in par
ticular, may give you the spirit
of unity.
KUTCL xptcrrov Ir/Toyy, according
to Jesus Christ.^ either like Christ
or according to the will of Christ.
Comp. KUTU lo-aa/c, Gal. iv. 28.,
" That we may love one another
as Christ also loved us ; that we
may show such a spirit as Christ
showed in submitting to his
Father s will." Comp. ver. 3.
and 7.
TOV tov KUL TTUTEpa, the God
and Father.~\ Not God, even
VER. 5-8.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
411
aforetime were written for our learning, that we through
patience and through l comfort of the scriptures might
5 have hope. Now the God of -patience and consolation
grant you to be likeminded one toward another according
c to Christ Jesus : that ye may with one mind and one
mouth glorify the God* and Father of our Lord Jesus
: Christ. Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also
s received us 2 to the glory of God. For 3 I say that 4
Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth
Omit through.
You.
Now.
4 Add Jesus.
the Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ, as in the English Ver
sion ; a translation which appa
rently arises out of a fear of
calling God, the God of our
Lord Jesus Christ ; but, " the
God and Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ," as in Gal. i. 4.
God is called, "our God and
Father;" and in Kphes. i. 17.,
" That the God of our Lord
Jesus Christ may give you the
spirit of wisdom." Cf. John. \\.
17., "My God and your God;"
1 Cor. xi. 3., <fc the head of Christ
is God ;" and lleb. i. 9., "God
even thy God ;" also 2 Cor. xi.
81.
7. Wherefore receive one an
other, the weak the strong, and
I lie strong (lie weak; the flew the
Gentile, and the Gentile the flew;
as Christ also received you to the
glory of God.
The seventh verse is connected
with both the sixth and eighth.
"Be of one mind, that ye mav
glorify God, and receive one an
other as friends, as Christ also
received you to the glory of God."
For 1 say that he has received
both Jew and Gentile.
8. Xt yw yap, for /AW/.] This
verse has been explained as fol
lows : "For (or if we read 3e,
now) I say that Christ is the
minister of the circumcision, that
is. the minister of the Jews, for
the truth of God, to establish the
promises made unto the fathers,
and that the Gentiles may glorify
God for His mercy;" in other
words, "Christ has received the
circumcision into His glory, as
he has also received the Gen
tiles." According to this way of
taking the words, there would
have been no difficulty in the
construction, hail the order been
dilferent, or if the words uitfwc
TO. t tJrr; elg 3oay, or
rov titov, had fol
lowed, so as to recall the words
7rpoffe\a,e.To vpdc which preceded.
A strong objection to this
mode of explaining the passage
is the use of the word Trfpt-o/n/,
without the article, for the flews.
Kven supposing the gramma tieal
ditlieulty to be removed, the lan
guage is still unlike that of St.
Paul, whose tone is not that there
were 1 two Gospels, one for the
flew, another for the Gentile, or
that Christ was the minister of
the circumcision to the flew, and
of the uncircumcision to the Gen
tile, but that he is the medium
412
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
[Cii. XV.
/cat
Oeov els TO /3e/3cu<S<ra<, ras eTrayyeXias rwz/ Trare- 9
ra Se eOvrj virep eXeovs Sofcurai TOJ> 6e6v, KaOvs ye-
i AIOLTOVTO e^o/^oXoy^cro/xai croi et> tOvecriv, KOI TOJ
i crov \fja\oj. Kal TTVL\W Xeyei Ev(f)pdv0r}T eOvrj 10
rov Xaov avrov. /cai traXiv Xeyei 1 ^t^eire Trdvra ra n
ro^ Kvpiov, KOL ItraweordTaMTav 2 avro* trdVres 01 Xaoi.
Hcraias Xeyei v crTat 17 pt^a rou Jecrcrat, Acal 6 12
ap^tiv idv&v, ITT avra> #^77 eXTTtoucrt^. 6 Se 13
Kal
1 Om.
Leg. AireTre T^J/ Kvpiov
ra> Trtcrreuet^, etg TO Treptcrcrevet^ v/^as e^ rij l\77iSi iv
dytov.
Tfavra. 2 tTraiveirare.
which is explained by the words
immediately following ; " to con
firm the promises made unto the
Fathers." Compare iv. 16., tig
TO tivcLL ptpaicLV TYJV 7TttyyeA./a i
TTCLVTl Tljj (TTreppaTl, 0V TU) /C TOV
vofjLov povor, and, as a remoter
parallel, Rom. iii. 26., elg TO
eivai O.VTOV ^IKULOV.
EIQ TO (3e(3a.L<Jjcrai.^ It is not
certain whether, in these words,
St. Paul is referring to the ful
filment of the promises to the
Jews (see c. xi.), or to the trans
fer of them which he had made
in the fourth chapter to the
Gentiles. Either would in his
view have been a true perform
ance of them.
ra cf 0i r?,] governed of elg :
SE intimates the new aspect under
which this fulfilment is regarded :
" Howbeit that the Gentiles," etc.
9. Aia TOUTO e^opoXoyj jffojjicn,
therefore I will give thanks.~\
These words, which are exactly
quoted from the LXX., Ps. xviii.
49., are in their original meaning
an expression of triumph after a
victory, for which the victor says
he will give thanks among the
of communion with the Jewish
dispensation, whereby the privi
leges of the Jew are extended to
all mankind. As Abraham is
called a father of circumcision to
all them that are uncircumcised,
so Christ, " born under the law,"
is the minister of the circum
cision to the Gentiles. The re
ception of the Gentiles was itself
included in the promise to Abra
ham, according to St. Paul s in
terpretation of it. Hence the se
cond clause, ret e ttivr], is only a
more distinct enunciation of what
is already implied in the first.
St. Paul "asserts" that Jesus
Christ is the minister of circum
cision, to establish the promises
made to the fathers, in the same
sense that it is said that he was
to build the Temple, or to fulfil
the law ; another aspect of which
ministration is that the Gentiles
should glorify God for the mercy
which they have obtained of him.
Compare the introduction to c.
iv., and note on iv. 12.
vTrtp aXrjOeiaQ Oeov, for the truth
of God, ] "to make good the
truth of God," the meaning of
VER 913.]
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
413
9 of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers :
and that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy ;
as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee
10 among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name. And
11 again* it saith, Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people.
And again, it saith 1 , Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles ;
12 and let all the people laud him. 2 And again, Esaias
saith, "There shall be the* root of Jesse, and he that shall
rise to reign over the Gentiles ; in him shall the Gentiles
13 hope.* Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and
peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through
the power of the Holy Ghost.
1 Om. it saith.
8 Laud him all ye people.
subject people. In the applica
tion made of them by St. Paul,
they are supposed to be uttered
by a Gentile, and the word lftvn\
receives, as elsewhere, a new
sense.
10. Kcii TraXtv Xeycc, and again
it saith.~] sc. ?/ ypa^//, " the Scrip
ture," as in Rom. ix. 17. and else
where. The words which follow
are taken from Deut. xxxii. 43.,
in which passage Moses exhorts
the heathen to sing the praises
of God for his dealings with the
Jewish people. The verse in
the LXX. is greatly interpolated,
and in the midst of the interpo
lation exhibits the words here
quoted.
11. AlvelTE TraiTd ra tQvq TQV
Kvpiov.~] These words are taken,
with a slight change in their
order, from Ps. cxvii. 1. As in
the previous verse, the word
edvtj has received a new meaning.
The writer meant to say, " Praise
the Lord, all ye nations, for His
goodness to Israel His people."
The application which St. Paul
makes of the words is, "Praise
the Lord, O ye Gentiles, for he
has given you a share in his
mercies to the house of Israel."
12."E0rcu,/c.r.X.] The quotation
is from the LXX., which reads :
f.ara.1 iv rrj fipepq. EKeivr] rj pia
TOV leffffai K cu 6 c triffrufjiEvog apyf.iv
.
(Is. xi. 10.) These words are
not, however, an exact translation
of the Hebrew, which is as fol
lows : " And in that day shall the
shoot of Jesse, which is set up for
a banner, be sought of the Gen
tiles."
13. But says the Apostle, go
ing off upon the word iX-jriowtv
of the previous verse, as at ver. 5.
on the words viro^ovi] and Trapu-
/cXr/o-te, May the God of hope,
who is the hope of the Gentiles,
fill you he adds, not without
reference to his previous exhor
tations to unity with joy and
peace, in believing ; that you
may have yet more of that hope,
by the instrumentality of His
Holy Spirit !
414
EPISTLE TO THE ROMA 
Open Library