Rom 3:21-4:25 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 21. But now . The apostle, having shown the entire failure of all attempts to be justified by the law, whether among Jews or Gentiles, proceeds to state fully the plan of justification by Jesus Christ in the gospel. To do this was the main design of the epistle, . He makes, therefore, in the close of this chapter, an explicit statement of the nature of the doctrine; and in the following parts of the epistle he fully-proves it, and illustrates its effects. The righteousness of God . God's plan of justifying men. . Without the law . In a way different from personal obedience to the law. It does not mean that God abandoned his law; or that Jesus Christ did not regard the law, for he came to "magnify" it, or that sinners after they are justified have no regard to the law; but it means simply what the apostle had been endeavouring to show, that justification could not be accomplished by personal obedience to any law of Jew or Gentile, and that it must be accomplished in some other way. Being witnessed . Being borne witness to. It was not a new doctrine; it was found in the Old Testament. The apostle makes this observation with special reference to the Jews . He does not declare any new thing, but that which was fully declared in their own sacred writings. By the law . This expression here evidently denotes, as it did commonly among the Jews, the five books of Moses. And the apostle means to say that this doctrine was found in those books; not that it was in the ten commandments, or in the law , strictly so called. It is not a part of law to declare justification except by strict and perfect obedience. That it was found in those books the apostle shows by the case of Abraham, . See also his reasoning on , and , in ; comp. . And the prophets . Generally, the remainder of the Old Testament. The phrase "the law and the prophets" comprehended the whole of the Old Testament, . That this doctrine was contained in the prophets, the apostle showed by the passage quoted from , in , "The just shall live by faith." The same thing he showed in , from ; and , from . The same thing is fully taught in . Indeed, the general tenor of the Old Testament-- the appointment of sacrifices, etc.--taught that man was a sinner, and that he could not be justified by obedience to the moral law. (z) "by the Law and the Prophets"

Romans 3:21-31

Verse 21. But now. The apostle, having shown the entire failure of all attempts to be justified by the law, whether among Jews or Gentiles, proceeds to state fully the plan of justification by Jesus Christ in the gospel. To do this was the main design of the epistle, Rom 1:17. He makes, therefore, in the close of this chapter, an explicit statement of the nature of the doctrine; and in the following parts of the epistle he fully-proves it, and illustrates its effects.

The righteousness of God. God's plan of justifying men. Rom 1:17.

Without the law. In a way different from personal obedience to the law. It does not mean that God abandoned his law; or that Jesus Christ did not regard the law, for he came to "magnify" it, Isa 42:21 or that sinners after they are justified have no regard to the law; but it means simply what the apostle had been endeavouring to show, that justification could not be accomplished by personal obedience to any law of Jew or Gentile, and that it must be accomplished in some other way.

Being witnessed. Being borne witness to. It was not a new doctrine; it was found in the Old Testament. The apostle makes this observation with special reference to the Jews. He does not declare any new thing, but that which was fully declared in their own sacred writings.

By the law. This expression here evidently denotes, as it did commonly among the Jews, the five books of Moses. And the apostle means to say that this doctrine was found in those books; not that it was in the ten commandments, or in the law, strictly so called. It is not a part of law to declare justification except by strict and perfect obedience. That it was found in those books the apostle shows by the case of Abraham, Rom 4. See also his reasoning on Lev 18:5, and De 30:12-14, in Rom 10:5-11; comp. Ex 34:6,7.

And the prophets. Generally, the remainder of the Old Testament. The phrase "the law and the prophets" comprehended the whole of the Old Testament, Mt 5:17, 11:13, 22:40, Acts 13:15, 28:23. That this doctrine was contained in the prophets, the apostle showed by the passage quoted from Hab 2:4, in Hab 1:17, "The just shall live by faith." The same thing he showed in Rom 10:11, from Isa 28:16, 49:23; and Rom 4:6-8, from Ps 22. The same thing is fully taught in Isa 53:11, Dan 9:24. Indeed, the general tenor of the Old Testament-- the appointment of sacrifices, etc.--taught that man was a sinner, and that he could not be justified by obedience to the moral law.

(z) "by the Law and the Prophets" Acts 26:22 Verse 22. Even the righteousness of God. The apostle, having stated that the design of the gospel was to reveal a new plan of becoming just in the sight of God, proceeds here more fully to explain it. The explanation which he offers makes it plain that the phrase so often used by him, "righteousness of God," does not refer to an attribute of God, but to his plan of making men righteous. Here he says that it is by faith in Jesus Christ; but surely an attribute of God is not produced by faith in Jesus Christ. It means God's mode of regarding men as righteous through their belief in Jesus Christ.

By faith of Jesus Christ. That is, by faith in Jesus Christ. Thus the expression, Mk 11:22, "Have the faith of God," (margin,) means, have faith in God. So Acts 3:16, the "faith of his name," (Greek,) means, faith in his name. So Gal 2:20, the "faith of the Son of God" means, faith in the Son of God. This cannot mean that faith is the meritorious cause of salvation, but that it is the instrument or means by which we become justified. It is the state of mind, or condition of the heart, to which God has been pleased to promise justification. (On the nature of faith, Mk 16:16.) God has promised that they who believe in Christ shah be pardoned and saved. This is his plan in distinction from the plan of those who seek to be justified by works.

Unto all and upon all. It is evident that these expressions are designed to be emphatic, but why both are used is not very apparent. Many have supposed that there was no essential difference in the meaning. If there be a difference, it is probably this: the first expression, "unto all"--ειςπαντας--may denote that this plan of justification has come (Luther) unto all men, to Jews and Gentiles; i.e. that it has been provided for them and offered to them without distinction. The plan was ample for all, was fitted for all, was equally necessary for all, and was offered to all. The second phrase, "upon all"--επιπαντας--may be designed to guard against the supposition that all therefore would be benefited by it, or be saved by the mere face that the announcement had come to all. The apostle adds, therefore, that the benefits of this plan must actually come upon all, or must be applied to all, if they would be justified. They could not be justified merely by the fact that the plan was provided, and that the knowledge of it had come to all, but by their actually coming under this plan, and availing themselves of it. Perhaps there is reference in the last expression, "upon all," to a robe, or garment, that is placed upon one to hide his nakedness, or sin. Comp. Isa 64:6, also Php 3:9.

For there is no difference. That is, there is no difference in regard to the matter under discussion. The apostle does not mean to say that there is no difference in regard to the talents, dispositions, education, and property of men; but there is no distinction in regard to the way in which they must be justified. All must be saved, if saved at all, in the same mode, whether Jews or Gentiles, bond or free, rich or poor, learned or ignorant. None can be saved by works; and all are therefore dependent on the mercy of God in Jesus Christ.

(a) "faith of Jesus Christ" Rom 5:1 Verse 23. For all have sinned. This was the point which he had fully established in the discussion in these chapters.

And come short. Greek, Are deficient in regard to; are wanting, etc. Here it means, that they had failed to obtain, or were destitute of.

The glory of God. The praise or approbation of God. They had sought to be justified, or approved, by God; but all had failed. Their works of the law had not secured his approbation; and they were therefore under condemnation. The word glory--δοξα--is often used in the sense of praise, or approbation. Jn 5:41,44; Jn 7:18; 8:50,54, 12:43.

(b) "all have sinned" Eccl 7:20 Verse 24. Being justified. Being treated as if righteous; that is, being regarded and treated as if they had kept the law. The apostle has shown that they could not be so regarded and treated by any merit of their own, or by personal obedience to the law. He now affirms that if they were so treated, it must be by mere favour, and as a matter not of right, but of gift. This is the essence of the gospel. And to show this, and the way in which it is done, is the main design of this epistle. The expression here is be understood as referring to all who are justified, Rom 3:22. The righteousness of God, by faith in Jesus Christ, is "upon all who believe," who are all "justified freely by his grace."

Freely--δωρεαν. This word stands opposed to that which is purchased, or which is obtained by labour, or which is a matter of claim. It is a free, undeserved gift, not merited by our obedience to the law, and not that to which we have any claim. The apostle uses the word here in reference to those who are justified. To them it is a mere undeserved gift. It does not mean that it has been obtained, however, without any price or merit from any one, for the Lord Jesus has purchased it with his own blood, and to him it becomes a matter of justice that those who were given to him should be justified, 1Cor 6:20, 7:23, 2Pet 2:1, 1Pet 2:9, (Greek.) Acts 20:28, Isa 53:11. We have no offering to bring, and no claim. To us, therefore, it is entirely a matter of gift.

By his grace. By his favour; by his mere undeserved mercy. Rom 1:7.

Through the redemption--διατηςαπολυτρωσεως. The word used here occurs but ten times in the New Testament, Lk 21:28, Rom 3:24, 8:23, 1Cor 1:30 Eph 1:7,14, 4:30, Col 1:14, Heb 9:15, 11:35. Its root--λυτρον lutron--properly denotes the price which is paid for a prisoner of war; the ransom, or stipulated purchase-money, which being paid, the captive is set free. The word here used is then employed to denote liberation from bondage, captivity, or evil of any kind, usually keeping up the idea of a price, or a ransom paid, in consequence of which the delivery is effected. It is sometimes used, in a large sense, to denote simple deliverance by any means, without reference to a price paid, as in Lk 21:28, Rom 8:23, Eph 1:14. That this is not the sense here, however, is apparent. For the apostle in the next verse proceeds to specify the price which has been paid, or the means by which this redemption has been effected. The word here denotes that deliverance from sin, and from the evil consequences of sin, which has been effected by the offering of Jesus Christ as a propitiation, Rom 3:25.

That is in Christ Jesus. Or, that has been effected by Christ Jesus; that of which he is the author and procurer. Comp. Jn 3:16. Verse 25. Whom God hath set forth. Margin, Fore-ordained --προεθετο. The word properly means, to place in public view; to exhibit in a conspicuous, situation, as goods are exhibited or exposed for sale, or as premiums or rewards of victory were exhibited to public view in the games of the Greeks. It sometimes has the meaning of decreeing, purposing, or constituting, as in the margin, (comp. Rom 1:13, Eph 1:9) and many have supposed that this is its meaning here. But the connexion seems to require the usual signification of the word; and it means that God has publicly exhibited Jesus Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of men. This public exhibition was made by his being offered on the cross, in the face of angels and of men. It was not concealed; it was done openly. He was put to open shame; and so put to death as to attract towards the scene the eyes of angels, and of the inhabitants of all worlds.

To be a propitiation--ιλαστηριον. This word occurs but in one other place in the New Testament: Heb 9:5, "And over it (the ark) the cherubim of glory shadowing the mercy-seat." It is used here to denote the lid or cover of the ark of the covenant. It was made of gold, and over it were the cherubim. In this sense it is often used by the LXX. Ex 25:17, "And thou shalt make a propitatory--ιλαστηριον, of gold," Ex 25:18-20,22 30:6 31:7 35:12 37:6-9 40:20 Le 16:2,13. The Hebrew name for this was capphoreth, from the verb caphar, to cover, or conceal. It was from this place that God was represented as speaking to the children of Israel: Ex 25:22, "And I will speak to thee front above the Ilasterion," the propitiatory, the mercy-seat; Lev 16:2, "For I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy.seat." This seat, or cover, was covered with the smoke o( the incense, when the high priest entered the most holy place, Lev 16:13. And the blood of the bullock offered on the great day of atonement was to be sprinkled "upon the mercy-seat," and "before the mercy-seat," "seven times," Lev 16:14,15. This sprinkling or offering of blood was called making "an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel," etc., Lev 16:16. It was from this mercy-seat that God pronounced pardon, or expressed himself as reconciled to his people. The atonement was made, the blood was sprinkled, and the reconciliation thus effected. The name was thus given to that cover of the ark, because it was the place from which God declared himself reconciled to his people. Still the inquiry is, why is this name given to Jesus Christ? In what sense is he declared to be a propitiation? It is evident that it cannot be applied to him in any literal sense. Between the golden cover of the ark of the covenant and the Lord Jesus the analogy must be very slight, if any such analogy can be perceived. We may observe, however,

(1.) that the main idea, in regard to the cover of the ark called the mercy-seat, was that of God's being reconciled to his people; and that this is the main idea in regard to the Lord Jesus, whom "God hath set forth."

(2.) This reconciliation was effected then by the sprinkling of blood on the mercy-seat, Lev 16:15,16. The same is true of the Lord Jesus --by blood.

(3.) In the former case it was [by] the blood of atonement; the offering of the bullock on the great day of atonement, that the reconciliation was effected, Lev 16:17,18. In the case of the Lord Jesus it was also by blood--by the blood of atonement. But it was by his own blood. This the apostle distinctly states in this verse.

(4.) In the former case there was a sacrifice, or expiatory offering; and so it is in reconciliation by the Lord Jesus. In the former, the mercy-seat was the visible, declared place where God would express his reconciliation with his people. So in the latter, the offering of the Lord Jesus is the manifest and open way by which God will be recon- ciled to men.

(5.) In the former, there was joined the idea of a sacrifice for sin, Lev 16:1. So in the latter. And hence the main idea of the apostle here is to convey the idea of a sacrifice for sin; or to set forth the Lord Jesus as such a sacrifice. Hence the word "propitiation" in the original may express the idea of a propitiatory sacrifice, as well as the cover to the ark. The word is an adjective, and may be joined to the noun sacrifice, as well as to denote the mercy-seat of the ark. This meaning accords also with its classic meaning to denote a propitiatory offering, or an offering to produce reconciliation. Christ is thus represented, not as a mercy-seat, which would be unintelligible; but as the medium, the offering, the expiation, by which reconciliation is produced between God and man.

Through faith. Or, by means of faith. The offering will be of no avail without faith. The offering has been made; but it will not be applied, except where there is faith. He has made an offering which may be efficacious in putting away sin; but it produces no reconciliation, no pardon, except where it is accepted by faith.

In his blood. Or, in his death--his bloody death. Among the Jews, the blood was regarded as the seat of life, or vitality, Lev 17:11, "The life of the flesh is in the blood." Hence they were commanded not to eat blood: Gen 9:4, "But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat." Lev 19:26, De 12:23, 1Sam 14:34. This doctrine is contained uniformly in the sacred Scriptures. And it has been also the opinion of not a few celebrated physiologists, as well in modern as in ancient times. The same was the opinion of the ancient Pharisees and Hindoos. Homer thus often speaks of blood as the seat of life, as in the expression πορφυρεοςθανατος, or purple death. And Virgil speaks of purple life, Purpuream vomit ille animam.

AEniad, ix. 349.

Empedocles and Critias, among the Greek philosophers, also embraced this opinion. Among the moderns, Harvey, to whom we are indebted for a knowledge of the circulation of the blood, fully believed it. Hoffman and Huxham believed it. Dr. John Hunter has fully adopted the belief, and sustained it, as he supposed, by a great variety of considerations. See Good's Book of Nature, pp. 102, 108, Edit. New York, 1828. This was undoubtedly the doctrine of the Hebrews; and hence with them to shed the blood was a phrase signifying to kill; hence the efficacy of their sacrifices was supposed to consist in the blood, that is, in the life of the victim. Hence it was unlawful to eat it, as it was the life, the seat of vitality; the more immediate and direct gift of God. When therefore the blood of Christ is spoken of in the New Testament, it means the offering of his life as a sacrifice, or his death as an expiation. His life was given to make atonement. See the word blood thus used in Rom 5:9, Eph 1:7, Col 1:14, Heb 9:12,14; Heb 13:12, Rev 1:5, 1Pet 1:19, 1Jn 1:7. By faith in his death as a sacrifice for sin; by believing that he took our sins; that he died in our place; by thus, in some sense, making his offering ours; by approving it, loving it, embracing it, trusting it, our sins become pardoned, and our souls made pure.

To declare. ειςενδειξιν. For the purpose of showing, or exhibiting; to present it to man. The meaning is, that the plan was adopted; the Saviour was given; he suffered and died; and the scheme is proposed to men, for the purpose of making a full manifestation of his plan, in contradistinction from all the plans of men.

His righteousness. His plan of justification. The method or scheme which he has adopted, in distinction from that of man, and which he now exhibits, or proffers to sinners. There is great variety in the explanation of the word here rendered righteousness. Some explain it as meaning veracity; others as holiness; others as goodness; others as essential justice. Most interpreters, perhaps, have explained it as referring to an attribute of God. But the whole connexion requires us to understand it here as in Rom 1:17, not of an attribute of God, but of his plan of justifying sinners. He has adopted and proposed a plan by which men may become just by faith in Jesus Christ, and not by their own works. His acquitting men from sin; his regarding them and treating them as just, is set forth in the gospel by the offering of Jesus Christ as a sacrifice on the cross.

For the remission of sins. Margin, Passing over. The word here used (παρεσιν) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, nor in the Septuagint. It means passing by, as not noticing; and hence forgiving. A similar idea occurs in 2Sam 24:10, Mic 7:18: "Who is a God like unto thee, that passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance?" In Romans it means for the pardoning, or in order to pardon past transgression.

That are past. That have been committed; or that have existed before. This has been commonly understood to refer to past generations, as affirming that sins under all dispensations of the world are to be forgiven in this manner, through the sacrifice of Christ. And it has been supposed that all who have been justified have received pardon by the merits of the sacrifice of Christ. This may be true; but there is no reason to think that this is the idea in this passage, for

(1.) the scope of the passage does not require it. The argument is not to show how men had been justified, but how they might be. It is not to discuss an historical fact, but to state the way in which sin was to be forgiven under the gospel.

(2.) The language has no immediate or necessary reference to past generations. It evidently refers to the past lives of the individuals who are justified, and not to the sins of former times. All that the passage means, therefore, is, that the plan of pardon is such as completely to remove all the former sins of the life, not of all former generations. If it referred to the sins of former times, it would not be easy to avoid the doctrine of universal salvation.

Through the forbearance of God. Through his patience, his long-suffering. That is, he did not come forth in judgment when the sin was committed; he spared us, though deserving of punishment; and now he comes forth completely to pardon those sins concerning which he has so long and so graciously exercised forbearance. This expression obviously refers not to the remission of sins, but to the fact that they were committed while he evinced such long-suffering. Comp. Acts 17:30. I do not know better how to show the practical value and bearing of this important passage of Scripture, than by transcribing a part of the affecting experience of the poet Cowper. It is well known that before his conversion he was oppressed by a long and dreadful melancholy; that this was finally heightened to despair; and that he was then subjected to the kind treatment of Dr. Cotton in St. Alban's, as a melancholy case of derangement. His leading thought was, that he was doomed to inevitable destruction, and that there was no hope. From this he was roused only by the kindness of his brother, and by the promises of the gospel. (See Taylor's Life of Cowper.) The account of his conversion I shall now give in his own words. "The happy period,, which was to shake off my fetters, and afford me a clear discovery of the free mercy of God in Christ Jesus was now arrived. I flung myself into a chair near the window, and, seeing a Bible there, ventured once more to apply to it for comfort and instruction. The first verse I saw was the 25th of the third chapter of Romans, Whom God hath set forth, etc. Immediately I received strength to believe, and the full beam of the Sun of Righteousness shone upon me. I saw the sufficiency of the atonement he had made for my pardon and justification. In a moment I believed, and received the peace of the gospel. Unless the almighty Arm had been under me, I think I should have been overwhelmed with gratitude and joy. My eyes filled with tears, and my voice choked with transport. I could only look up to heaven in silent fear, overwhelmed with love and wonder. How glad should I now have been to have spent every moment in prayer and thanksgiving. I lost no opportunity of repairing to a throne of grace; but flew to it with an earnestness irresistible, and never to be satisfied."

(1) "set forth" or, "fore-ordained" (2) "remission of sins" or, "passing over" Verse 26. At this time. The time now since the Saviour has come, now is the time when he manifests it.

That he might be just. This verse contains the substance of the gospel. The word "just" here does not mean benevolent, or merciful, though it may sometimes have that meaning, (Mt 1:19, also Jn 17:25) but it refers to the fact that God had retained the integrity of his character as a moral Governor; that he had shown a due regard to his law, and to the penalty of the law, by his plan of salvation. Should he forgive sinners without an atonement, justice would be sacrificed and abandoned. The law would cease to have any terrors for the guilty, and its penalty would be a nullity. In the plan of salvation, therefore, he has shown a regard to the law by appointing his Son to be a substitute in the place of sinners; not to endure its precise penalty, for his sufferings were not eternal, nor were they attended with remorse of conscience, or by despair, which are the proper penalty of the law; but he endured so much as to accomplish the same ends as if those who shall be saved by him had been doomed to eternal death. That is, he showed that the law could not be violated without introducing suffering; and that it could not be broken with impunity, he showed that he had so great a regard for it, that he would not pardon one sinner without an atonement. And thus he secured the proper honour to his character as a lover of his law, a hater of sin, and a just God. He has shown that if sinners do not avail themselves of the offer of pardon by Jesus Christ, they must experience in their own souls for ever the pains which this substitute for sinners endured in behalf of men on the cross. Thus, no principle of justice has been abandoned; no threatening has been modified; no claim of his law has been let down; no disposition has been evinced to do injustice to the universe by suffering the guilty to escape. He is in all this great transaction, a just moral governor, as just to his law, to himself, to his Son, to the universe, when he pardons, as he is when he sends the incorrigible sinner down to hell. A full compensation, an equivalent, has been provided by the sufferings of the Saviour in the sinner's stead, and the sinner may be pardoned.

And the justifier of him, etc. Greek, Even justifying him that believeth, etc. This is the peculiarity and the wonder of the gospel, Even while pardoning, and treating the ill-deserving as if they were innocent, he can retain his pure and holy character. His treating the guilty with favour does not show that he loves guilt and pollution, for he has expressed his abhorrence of it in the atonement. His admitting them to friendship and heaven does not show that he approves their past conduct and character, for he showed how much he hated even their sins by giving his Son to a shameful death for them. When an executive pardons offenders, there is an abandonment of the principles of justice and law. The sentence is set aside; the threatenings of the law are departed from; and it is done without compensation. It is declared that, in certain cases, the law may be violated, and its penalty not be inflicted. But not so with God. He shows no less regard to his law in pardoning than in punishing. This is the grand, glorious, peculiar feature of the gospel plan of salvation.

Him which believeth in Jesus. Gr., Him who is of the faith of Jesus; in contradistinction from him who is of the works of the law; that is, who depends on his own works for salvation.

(c) "that he might be just" Acts 13:38,39 Verse 27. Where is boasting then? Where is there ground or occasion of boasting or pride? Since all have sinned, and since all have failed of being able to justify themselves by obeying the law, and since all are alike dependent on the mere mercy of God in Christ, all ground of boasting is of course taken away. This refers particularly to the Jews, who were much addicted to boasting of their peculiar privileges. Rom 3:1, etc.

By what law? The word law here is used in the sense of arrangement, rule, or economy. By what arrangement, or by the operation of what rule, is boasting excluded? Stuart. See Gal 3:21, Acts 21:20.

Of works? The law which commands works, and on which the Jews relied. If this were complied with, and they were thereby justified, they would have had ground of self-confidence, or boasting, as being justified by their own merits. But a plan which led to this, which ended in boasting, and self-satisfaction, and pride, could not be true.

Nay. No.

The law of faith. The rule, or arrangement which proclaims that we have no merit; that we are lost sinners; and that we are to be justified only by faith. Verse 28. Therefore. As the result of the previous train of argument.

That a man. That all who are justified; that is, that there is no other way.

Is justified by faith. Is regarded and treated as righteous, by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Without the deeds of the law. Without works as a meritorious ground of justification. The apostle, of course, does not mean that Christianity does not produce good works, or that they who are justified will not obey the law, and be holy; but that no righteousness of their own will be the ground of their justification. They are sinners; and as such can have no claim to be treated as righteous. God has devised a plan by which they may be pardoned and saved; and that is by faith alone. This is the grand peculiarity of the Christian religion. This was the peculiar point in the reformation from popery. Luther often called this doctrine of justification by faith the article on which the church stood or fell--articulus stantis, vel earlentis ecclesiae--and it is so. If this doctrine is held entire, all others will be held with it. If this is abandoned, all others will fall also. It may be remarked here, however, that this doctrine by no means interferes with the doctrine that good works are to be performed by Christians. Paul urges this as much as any other writer in the New Testament. His doctrine is, that they are not to be relied on as a ground of justification; but that he did not mean to teach that they are not to be performed by Christians is apparent from the connexion, and from the following places in his epistles: Rom 2:7, 2Cor 9:8, Eph 2:10, 1Timm 2:10, 5:10,25, 6:18, 2Ti 3:17, Tit 2:7,14; Tit 3:8, Heb 10:24. That we are justified by our works is a doctrine which he has urged and repeated with great power and frequency. See Rom 4:2,6, 9:11,32, 11:6, Gal 2:16, 3:2,5,10, Eph 2:9, 2Ti 1:9.

(d) "that a man" Rom 3:20-22, 8:3, Gal 2:16 Verses 29, 30. Is he the God, etc. The Jews supposed that he was the God of their nation only, that they only were to be admitted to his favour. In these verses Paul showed that as all had alike sinned, Jews and Gentiles, and as the plan of salvation by faith was adapted to sinners, without any special reference to Jews, so God could show favours to all, and all might be admitted on the same terms to the benefits of the plan of salvation. Verse 30. It is one God. The same God; there is but one, and his plan is equally fitted to Jews and Gentiles.

The circumcision. Those who are circumcised--the Jews.

The uncircumcision. Gentiles; all who were not Jews.

By faith--through faith. There is no difference in the meaning of these expressions. Both denote that faith is the instrumental cause of justification, or acceptance with God.

(e) "which shall justify" Gal 3:8,28 Verse 31. Do we then make void the law. Do we render it vain and useless; do we destroy its moral obligation; and do we prevent obedience to it, by the doctrine of justification by faith ? This was an objection which would naturally be made; and which has thousands of times been since made, that the doctrine of justification by faith tends to licentiousness. The word law here, I understand as referring to the moral law, and not merely to the Old Testament. This is evident from Rom 3:20,21, where the apostle shows that no man could be justified by deeds of law, by conformity with the moral law. See Note.

God forbid. By no means. Rom 3:4. This is an explicit denial of any such tendency.

Yea, we establish the law. That is, by the doctrine of justification by faith; by this scheme of treating men as righteous, the moral law is confirmed, its obligation is enforced, obedience to it is secured. This is done in the following manner:

(1.) God showed respect to it, in being unwilling to pardon sinners without an atonement. He showed that it could not be violated with impunity; that he was resolved to fulfil its threatenings.

(2.) Jesus Christ came to magnify it, and to make it honourable. He showed respect to it in his life; and he died to show that God was determined to inflict its penalty.

(3.) The plan of justification by faith leads to an observance of the law. The sinner sees the evil of transgression. He sees the respect which God has shown to the law. He gives his heart to God, and yields himself to obey his law. All the sentiments that arise from the conviction of sin; that flow from gratitude for mercies; that spring from love to God; all his views of the sacredness of the law, prompt him to yield obedience to it. The fact that Christ endured such sufferings to show the evil of violating the law, is one of the strongest motives prompting to obedience. We do not easily and readily repeat that which overwhelms our best friends in calamity; and we are brought to hate that which inflicted such woes on the Saviour's soul. The sentiment recorded by Watts is as true as it is beautiful :-- '"Twas for my sins my dearest Lord

Hung on the cursed tree,

And groan'd away his dying life

For thee, my soul, for thee.

"Oh, how I hate those lusts of mine

That crucified my Lord;

Those sins that pierc'd and nail'd his flesh

Fast to'the fatal wood.

"Yes, my Redeemer, they shall die,

My heart hath so decreed,

Nor will I spare the guilty things

That made my Saviour bleed."

This is an advantage in moral influence which no cold, abstract law ever has over the human mind. And one of the chief glories of the plan of salvation is, that while it justifies the sinner, it brings a new set of influences from heaven, more tender and mighty than can be drawn from any other source, to produce obedience to the law of God.

(f) "through faith" Heb 10:15,16

Romans 4

ROMANS Chapter 4

Verse 1. The main object of this chapter is to show that the doctrine of justification by faith, which the apostle was defending, was found in the Old Testament. The argument is to be regarded as addressed particularly to a Jew, to show him that no new doctrine was advanced. The argument is derived, first, from the fact that Abraham was so justified, (Rom 4:1-5) secondly, from the fact that the same thing is declared by David, (Rom 4:6-8.)

A question might still be asked, whether this justification was not in consequence of their being circumcised, and thus grew out of conformity to the law? To answer this, the apostle shows (Rom 4:9-12) that Abraham was justified by faith before he was circumcised; and that even his circumcision was in consequence of his being justified by faith, and a public seal or attestation of that fact.

Still further, the apostle shows that if men were to be justified by works, faith would be of no use; and the promises of God would have no effect. The law works wrath, (Rom 4:13,14) but the conferring of the favour by faith is demonstration of the highest favour of God, (Rom 4:16.) Abraham, moreover, had evinced a strong faith; he had shown what it was; he was an example to all who should follow. And he had thus shown that as he was justified before circumcision, and before the giving of the law, so the same thing might occur in regard to those who had never been circumcised. In chapters 2 and 3 the apostle had shown that all had failed of keeping the law, and that there was no other way of justification but by faith. To the salvation of the heathen, the Jew would have strong objections. He supposed that none could be saved but those who had been circumcised, and who were Jews. This objection the apostle meets in this chapter, by showing that Abraham was justified in the very way in which he maintained the heathen might be; that Abraham was justified by faith without being circumcised. If the father of the faithful, the ancestor on whom the Jews so much prided themselves, was thus justified, then Paul was advancing no new doctrine in maintaining that the same thing might occur now. He was keeping strictly within the spirit of their religion in maintaining that the Gentile world might also be justified by faith. This is the outline of the reasoning in this chapter. The reasoning is such as a serious Jew must feel and acknowledge. And keeping in mind the main object which the apostle had in it, there will be found little difficulty in its interpretation.

Verse 1. What shall we then say? See Rom 3:1. This is rather the objection of a Jew. "How does your doctrine of justification by faith agree with what the Scriptures say of Abraham? Was the law set aside in his case? Did he derive no advantage in justification from the rite of circumcision, and from the covenant which God made with him." The object of the apostle now is to answer this inquiry.

That Abraham our father. Our ancestor; the father and founder of the nation. Mt 3:9. The Jews valued themselves much on the fact that he was their father; and an argument, drawn from his example or conduct, therefore, would be peculiarly forcible.

As pertaining to the flesh. This expression is one that has been much controverted. In the original, it may refer either to Abraham as their father "according to the flesh"--that is, their natural father, or from whom they were descended--or it may be connected with "hath found." "What shall we say that Abraham our father hath found in respect to the flesh?" κατασαρκα. The latter is doubtless the proper connexion. Some refer the word flesh to external privileges and advantages; others to his own strength or power, (Calvin and Grotius;) and others make it refer to circumcision. This latter I take to be the correct interpretation. It agrees best with the connexion, and equally well with the usual meaning of the word. The idea is, "If men are justified by faith; if works are to have no place; if, therefore, all rites and ceremonies, all legal observances, are useless in justification, what is the advantage of circumcision? What benefit did Abraham derive from it? Why was it appointed? And why is such an importance attached to it in the history of his life?" A similar question was asked in Rom 3:1.

Hath found. Hath obtained. What advantage has he derived from it?

(g) "as pertaining" Mt 3:9 Verse 2. For if Abraham, etc. This is the answer of the apostle. If Abraham was justified on the ground of his own merits, he would have reason to boast, or to claim praise. He might regard himself as the author of it, and take the praise to himself. Rom 4:4. The inquiry therefore was, whether in the account of the justification of Abraham there was to be found any such statement of a reason for self-confidence and boasting.

But not before God. In the sight of God. That is, in his recorded judgment he had no ground of boasting on account of works. To show this, the apostle appeals at once to the Scriptures, to show that there was no such record as that Abraham could boast that he was justified by his works. As God judges right in all cases, so it follows that Abraham had no just ground of boasting, and of course that he was not justified by his own works. The sense of this verse is well expressed by Calvin. "If Abraham was justified by his works, he might boast of his own merits. But he has no ground of boasting before God. Therefore he was not justified by works."

(h) "not before God" Rom 3:27 Verse 3. For what saith the Scripture? The inspired account of Abraham's justification. This account was final, and was to settle the question. This account is found in Gen 15:6.

Abraham believed God. In the Hebrew, "Abraham believed Jehovah." The sense is substantially the same, as the argument turns on the act of believing. The faith which Abraham exercised was, that his posterity should be like the stars of heaven in number. This promise was made to him when he had no child, and of course when he had no prospect of such a posterity. See the strength and nature of this faith further illustrated in Rom 4:16-21. The reason why it was counted to him for righteousness was, that it was such a strong, direct, and unwavering act of confidence in the promise of God.

And it. The word "it" here evidently refers to the act of believing. It does not refer to the righteousness of another --of God, or of the Messiah; but the discussion is solely of the strong act of Abraham's faith, which in some sense was counted to him for righteousness. In what sense this was, is explained directly after. All that is material to remark here is, that the act of Abraham, the strong confidence of his mind in the promises of God, his unwavering assurance that what God had promised he would perform, was reckoned for righteousness. The same thing is more fully expressed in Rom 4:18-22. When, therefore, it is said that the righteousness of Christ is accounted or imputed to us; when it is said that his merits are transferred and reckoned as ours; whatever may be the truth of the doctrine, it cannot be defended by this passage of Scripture. Faith is always an act of the mind. It is not a created essence which is placed within the mind. It is not a substance created independently of the soul, and placed within it by almighty power. It is not a principle, for the expression a principle of faith is as unmeaning as a principle of joy, or a principle of sorrow, or a principle of remorse. God promises; the man believes; and this is the whole of it. While the word faith is sometimes used to denote religious doctrine, or the system that is to be believed, (Acts 6:7, 15:9, Rom 1:5, 10:8, 16:26, Eph 3:17, 4:5, 1Timm 2:7, etc.) yet, when it is used to denote that which is required of men, it always denotes an acting of the mind exercised in relation to some object, or some promise, or threatening, or declaration of some other being. Mk 16:16.

Was counted--(ελογισθη.) The same word in Rom 4:22 is rendered "it was imputed." The word occurs frequently in the Scriptures. In the Old Testament, the verb , (hashab,) which is translated by the word λογιζομαι, means, literally, to think, to intend, or purpose; to imagine, invent, or devise; to reckon, or account; to esteem; to impute, i.e. to impute to a man what belongs to himself, or what ought to be imputed to him. It occurs only in the following places: 1Sam 18:25, Est 8:3, 9:24,25, Isa 33:8, Jer 49:20, 50:45, Lam 2:8; 2Sam 14:14, Jer 49:30, Gen 1:20, Job 35:2, 2Sam 14:13, Eze 38:10, Jer 18:8 Ps 21:11, 140:2,4, Jer 11:19, 48:2, Amos 6:5, Ps 10:2, Isa 53:3, Jer 26:3, Mic 2:3, Nahh 1:11, Jer 18:11, Job 13:24, 41:27,29, Ps 32:2, 35:5, Isa 10:7, Job 19:11, 33:10, Gen 15:6, 38:15, 1Sam 1:13; Ps 52:2, Jer 18:18, Zech 7:10, Job 6:26, 19:11, Isa 13:17, 1Kgs 10:21; Nu 18:27,30, Ps 88:4, Isa 40:17, Lam 4:2, Isa 40:17, Lam 4:2, Isa 40:15; Gen 31:15. I have examined all the passages, and, as the result of my examination, have come to the conclusion, that there is not one in which the word is used in the sense of reckoning or imputing to a man that which does not strictly belong to him; or of charging on him that which ought not to be charged on him as a matter of personal right. The word is never used to denote imputing in the sense of transferring, or of charging that on one which does not properly belong to him. The same is the case in the New Testament. The word occurs about forty times, (see Schmidius' Concord.,)and in a similar signification. No doctrine of transferring, or of setting over to a man what does not properly belong to him, be it sin or holiness, can be derived, therefore, from this word. Whatever is meant by it here, it evidently is declared that the act of believing is that which is intended, both by Moses and by Paul.

For righteousness. In order to justification; or to regard and treat him in connexion with this as a righteous man; as one who was admitted to the favor and friendship of God. In reference to this we may remark,

(1.) that it is evidently not intended that the act of believing, on the part of Abraham, was the meritorious ground of acceptance; for then it would have been a work. Faith was as much his own act, as any act of obedience to the law.

(2.) The design of the apostle was to show that by the law, or by works, man could not be justified, Rom 3:28, 4:2.

(3.) Faith was not that which the law required. It demanded complete and perfect obedience; and if a man was justified by faith, it was in some other way than by the law.

(4.) As the law did not demand this, and as faith was something different from the demand of the law, so if a man were justified by that, it was on a principle altogether different from justification by works. It was not by personal merit. It was not by complying with the law. It was in a mode entirely different.

(5.) In being justified by faith, it is meant, therefore, that we are treated as righteous; that we are forgiven; that we are admitted to the favour of God, and treated as his friends.

(6.) In this act, faith is a mere instrument, an antecedent, a sine qua non, that which God has been pleased to appoint as a condition on which men may be treated as righteous. It expresses a state of mind which is demonstrative of love to God; of affection for his cause and character; of reconciliation and friendship; and is therefore that state to which he has been graciously pleased to promise pardon and acceptance.

(7.) As this is not a matter of law; as the law could not be said to demand it; as it is on a different principle; and as the acceptance of faith, or of a believer, cannot be a matter of merit or claim, so justification is of grace, or mere favour. It is in no sense a matter of merit on our part, and thus stands distinguished entirely from justification by works, or by conformity to the law. From beginning to end, it is, so far as we are concerned, a matter of grace. The merit by which all this is obtained is the work of the Lord Jesus Christ, through whom this plan is proposed, and by whose atonement alone God can consistently pardon and treat as righteous those who are in themselves ungodly. See Rom 4:5. In this place we have also evidence that faith is always substantially of the same character. In the case of Abraham it was confidence in God and his promises. All faith has the same nature, whether it be confidence in the Messiah, or in any of the Divine promises or truths. As this confidence evinces the same state of mind, so it was as consistent to justify Abraham by it, as it is to justify him who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ under the gospel. See Heb 11:1 and following.

(i) "Abraham believed" Gen 15:6 Verse 4. Now to him that worketh, etc. This passage is not to be understood as affirming that any actually have worked out their salvation by conformity to the law so as to be saved by their own merits; but it expresses a general truth in regard to works. On that plan, if a man were justified by his works, it would be a matter due to him. It is a general principle in regard to contracts and obligations, that where a man fulfills them he is entitled to the reward as that which is due to him, and which he can claim. This is well understood in all the transactions among men. Where a man has fulfilled the terms of a contract, to pay him is not a matter of favour; he has earned it; and we are bound to pay him. So, says the apostle, it would be, if a man were justified by his works, he would have a claim on God. It would be wrong not to justify him. And this is an additional reason why the doctrine cannot be true. Comp. Rom 11:6.

The reward. The pay, or wages. The word is commonly applied to the pay of soldiers, day-labourers, etc., Mt 20:8, Lk 10:7, 1Timm 5:18; Jas 5:4. It has a similar meaning here.

Reckoned. Greek, Imputed. The same word which, in Rom 4:3. is rendered counted, and in Rom 4:22, imputed. It is here used in its strict and proper sense, to reckon that as belonging to a man which is his own, or which is due to him.

Of grace. Of favour; as a gift.

Of debt. As due; as a claim; as a fair compensation according to the contract. Verse 5. But to him that worketh not. Who does not rely on his conformity to the law for his justification; who does not depend on his works; who seeks to be justified in some other way. The reference here is to the Christian plan of justification.

But believeth. Rom 3:26.

On him. On God. Thus the connexion requires; for the discussion has immediate reference to Abraham, whose faith was in the promise of God.

That justifieth the ungodly. This is a very important expression. It implies,

(1.) that men are sinners, or are ungodly.

(2.) That God regards them as such when they are justified, he does not justify them because he sees them to be, or regards them to be righteous; but knowing that they are in fact polluted. He does not first esteem them, contrary to fact, to be pure; but knowing that they are polluted, and that they deserve no favour, he resolves to forgive them, and to treat them as his friends.

(3.) In themselves they are equally undeserving, whether they are justified or not. Their souls have been defiled by sin; and that is known when they are pardoned. God judges things as they are; and sinners who are justified, he judges not as if they were pure, or as if they had a claim; but he regards them as united by faith to the Lord Jesus; and In THIS RELATION he judges that they SHOULD be treated as his friends, though they have been, are, and always will be, personally undeserving. It is not meant that the righteousness of Christ is transferred to them so as to become personally theirs--for moral character cannot be transferred;--nor that it is infused into them, making them personally meritorious--for then they could not be spoken of as ungodly; but that Christ died in their stead, to atone for their sins, and is regarded and esteemed by God to have died; and that the results or benefits of his death are so reckoned or imputed to believers as to make it proper for God to regard and treat them as if they had themselves obeyed the law; that is, as righteous in his sight.

(l) "his faith is counted" Hab 2:4 Verse 6. Even as David. The apostle, having adduced the example of Abraham to show that the doctrine which he was defending was not new, and contrary to the Old Testament, proceeds to adduce the case of David also; and to show that he understood the same doctrine of justification without works.

Describeth. Speaks of.

The blessedness. The happiness; or the desirable state or condition.

Unto whom God imputeth righteousness. Whom God treats as righteous, or as entitled to his favour in a way different from his conformity to the law. This is found in Ps 32. And the whole scope and design of the psalm is to show the blessedness of the man who is forgiven, and whose sins are not charged on him, but who is freed from the punishment due to his sins. Being thus pardoned, he is treated as a righteous man. And it is evidently in this sense that the apostle uses the expression "imputeth righteousness," i.e. he does not impute, or charge on the man his sins; he reckons and treats him as a pardoned and righteous man, Ps 32:2. He regards him as one who is forgiven and admitted to his favour, and who is to be treated henceforward as though he had not sinned. That is, he partakes of the benefits of Christ's atonement, so as not henceforward to be treated as a sinner, but as a friend of God. Verse 7. Blessed. Happy are they: they are highly favoured. Mt 5:3.

Whose sins are covered. Are concealed; or hidden from the view. On which God will no more look, and which he will no more remember. "By these words," says Calvin, (in loco,) "we are taught that justification with Paul is nothing else but pardon of sin." The word cover here has not reference to the atonement, but is expressive of hiding, or concealing, i.e. of forgiving sin.

(m) "Blessed are they" Psa 32:1,2 Verse 8. Will not impute sin. On whom the Lord will not charge his sins; or who shall not be reckoned or regarded as guilty. This shows clearly what the apostle meant by imputing faith without works. It is to pardon sin, and to treat with favour; not to reckon or charge a man's sin to him; but to treat him, though personally undeserving and ungodly, (Rom 4:5) as though the sin had not been committed. The word "impute" here is used in its natural and appropriate sense, as denoting to charge on man that which properly belongs to him. Verse 9. Cometh, etc. The apostle has now prepared the way for an examination of the inquiry whether this came in consequence of obedience to the law? or whether it was without obedience to the law? Having shown that Abraham was justified by faith, in accordance with the doctrine which he was defending, the only remaining inquiry was, whether it was after he was circumcised or before; whether in consequence of his circumcision or not. If it was after his circumcision, the Jew might still maintain that it was by complying with the works of the law; but if it was before, the point of the apostle would be established, that it was without the works of the law. Still further, if he was justified by faith before he was circumcised, then here was an instance of justification and acceptance without conformity to the Jewish law; and if the father of the Jewish nation was so justified, and reckoned as a friend of God without being circumcised, i.e. in the condition in which the heathen world then was, then it would follow that the Gentiles might be justified in a similar way now. It would not be departing, therefore, from the spirit of the Old Testament itself to maintain, as the apostle had done, (Rom 3) that the Gentiles who had not been circumcised might obtain the favour of God as well as the Jew; that is, that it was independent of circumcision, and might be extended to all.

This blessedness. This happy state, or condition. This state of being justified by God, and of being regarded as his friends. This is the sum of all blessedness; the only state that can be truly pronounced happy.

Upon the circumcision only. The Jews alone, as they pretended.

Or upon the uncircumcision also. The Gentiles who believed as the apostle maintained.

For we say. We all admit. It is a conceded point. It was the doctrine of the apostle, as well as the Jews; and as much theirs as his. With this, then, as a conceded point, what is the fair inference to be drawn from it? Verse 10. How. In what circumstances, or time.

When he was in circumcision, etc. Before or after he was circumcised? This was the very point of the inquiry. For if he was justified by faith after he was circumcised, the Jew might pretend that it was in virtue of his circumcision; that even his faith was acceptable, because he was circumcised. But if it was before he was circumcised, this plea could not be set up; and the argument of the apostle was confirmed by the case of Abraham, the great father and model of the Jewish people, that circumcision and the deeds of the law did not conduce to justification; and that as Abraham was justified without those works, so might others be; and the heathen, therefore, might be admitted to similar privileges.

Not in circumcision. Not being circumcised, or after he was circumcised, but before. This was the record in the case, Gen 15:6. Comp. Gen 17:10. Verse 11. And he received the sign, etc. A sign is that by which anything is shown or represented. And circumcision thus showed that there was a covenant between Abraham and God, Gen 17:1-10. It became the public mark or token of the relation which he sus- tained to God.

A seal. Jn 3:33. A seal is that mark of wax or other substance, which is attached to an instrument of writing, as a deed, etc., to confirm, ratify it, or to make it binding. Sometimes instruments were sealed, or made authentic by stamping on them some word, letter, or device, which had been engraved on silver, or on precious stones. The seal or stamp was often worn as an ornament on the finger. Est 8:8, Gen 41:42, 38:18, Ex 28:11,36, 39. To affix the seal, whether of wax or otherwise, was to confirm a contract or engagement. In allusion to this, circumcision is called a seal of the covenant which God had made with Abraham. That is, he appointed this as a public attestation to the fact that he had previously approved of Abraham, and had made important promises to him.

Which he had yet being circumcised, he believed, (Gen 15:6) was accepted, or justified; was admitted to the favour of God, and favoured with clear and remarkable promises, (Gen 15:18-21; 17:1-9) before he was circumcised. Circumcision, therefore, could have contributed neither to his justification, nor to the promise made to him by God.

That he might be the father, etc. All this was done that Abraham might be held up as an example, or a model, of the very doctrine which the apostle was defending. The word father here is used evidently in a spiritual sense, as denoting that he was the ancestor of all true believers; that he was their model and example. They are regarded as his children because they are possessed of his spirit; are justified in the same way, and are imitators of his example. Mt 1:1. In this sense the expression occurs in Lk 19:9, Jn 8:33, Gal 3:7,29.

Though they be not circumcised. This was stated fix opposition to the opinion of the Jews, that all ought to be circumcised. As the apostle had shown that Abraham enjoyed the favour of God previous to his being circumcised, that is, without circumcision, so it followed that others might on the same principle also. This instance settles the point; and there is nothing which a Jew can reply to this.

That righteousness, etc. That is, in the same way, by faith without works: that they might be accepted, and treated as righteous.

(n) "he received" Gen 17:10,11 (o) "father of all them that believe" Lk 19:9 Verse 12. And the father of circumcision, the father, i.e., the ancestor, exemplar, or model of those who are circumcised, and who possess the same faith that he did. Not only the father of all believers, (Rom 4:11) but, in a special sense, the father of the Jewish people. In this, the apostle intimates that though all who believed would be saved as he was, yet the Jews had a special proprietorship in Abraham; they had special favours and privileges from the fact that he was their ancestor.

Not of the circumcision only. Who are not merely circumcised, but who possess his spirit and his faith. Mere circumcision would not avail; but circumcision, connected with faith like his, showed that they were peculiarly his descendants. Rom 2:25.

Who walk in the steps, etc. Who imbibe his example; who imbibe his spirit; who have his faith.

Being yet uncircumcised. Before he was circumcised. Comp. Gen 15:6, with Gen 17. Verse 13. For the promise, etc. To show that the faith of Abraham, on which his justification depended, was not by the law, the apostle proceeds to show that the promise concerning which his faith was so remarkably evinced was before the law was given. If this was so, then it was an additional important consideration in opposition to the Jew, showing that acceptance with God depended on faith, and not on works.

That he should be the heir of the world. An heir is one who succeeds, or is to succeed to an estate. In this passage, the world, or the entire earth, is regarded as the estate to which reference is made; and the promise is, that the posterity of Abraham should succeed to that, or should possess it as their inheritance. The precise expression here used, "heir of the world," is not found in the promises made to Abraham. Those promises were, that God would make of him a great nation, (Gen 12:2) that in him all the families of the earth should be blessed, Gen 12:3; that his posterity should be as the stars for multitude, Gen 15:5 and that he should be a father of many nations, Gen 17:5. As this latter promise is one to which the apostle particularly refers, (Rom 4:17) it is probable that he had this in his eye. This promise had, at first, respect to his numerous natural descendants, and to their possessing the land of Canaan. But it is also regarded in the New Testament as extending to the Messiah Gal 3:16 as his descendant, and to all his followers as the spiritual seed of the father of the faithful. When the apostle calls him "the heir of the world," he sums up in this comprehensive expression all the promises made to Abraham, intimating that his spiritual descendants, i.e. those who possess his faith shall yet be so numerous as to possess all lands.

Or to his seed. To his posterity, or descendants.

Through the law. By the observance of the law; or made in consequence of observing the law; or depending on the condition that he should observe the law. The covenant was made before the law of circumcision was given; and long before the law of Moses, (comp. Gal 3:16,17,18a) and was independent of both.

But through, etc. In consequence of, or in connexion with, the strong confidence which he showed in the promises of God, Gen 15:6.

(p) "he should be the heir" Gen 17:4, etc. Verse 14. For if they which are of the law. Who seek for justification and acceptance by the law.

Faith is made void. Faith would have no place in the scheme; and consequently the strong commendations bestowed on the faith of Abraham, would be bestowed without any just cause. If men are justified by the law, they cannot be by faith, and faith would be useless in this work.

And the promise, etc. A promise looks to the future. Its design and tendency is to excite trust and confidence in him who makes it. All the promises of God have this design and tendency; and consequently, as God has given many promises, the object is to call forth the lively and constant faith of men, all going to show that, in the Divine estimation, faith is of inestimable value. But if men are justified by the law--if they are rendered acceptable by conformity to the institutions of Moses--then they cannot depend for acceptance on any promise made to Abraham, or his seed. They cut themselves off from that promise, and stand independent of it. That promise, like all other promises, was made to excite faith. If, therefore, the Jews depended on the law for justification, they were cut out from all the promises made to Abraham; and if they could be justified by the law, the promise was useless. This is as true now as it was then. If men seek to be justified by their morality, or their forms of religion, they cannot depend on any promise of God; for he has made no promise to any such attempt. They stand independently of any promise, covenant, or compact, and are depending on a scheme of their own; a scheme which would render his plan vain and useless; which would render his promises, and the atonement of Christ, and the work of the Spirit of no value. It is clear, therefore, that such an attempt at salvation cannot be successful.

(q) "For if they which are of the law" Gal 3:18 Verse 15. Because the law. All law. It is the tendency of law.

Worketh wrath. Produces or causes wrath. While man is fallen, and a sinner, its tendency, so far from justifying him, and producing peace, is just the reverse. It condemns, denounces wrath, and produces suffering. The word wrath here is to be taken in the sense of punishment, Rom 2:8; and the meaning is, that the law of God, demanding perfect purity, and denouncing every sin, condemns the sinner, and consigns him to punishment. As the apostle had proved Rom 1:1-3:29 that all were sinners, so it followed that if any attempted to be justified by the law, they would be involved only in condemnation and wrath.

For where no law is, etc. This is a general principle; a maxim of common justice and of common sense. Law is a rule of conduct. If no such rule is given and known, there can be no crime. Law expresses what may be done, and what may not be done. If there is no command to pursue a certain course, no injunction to forbid certain conduct, actions will be innocent. The connexion in which this declaration is made here seems to imply, that as the Jews had a multitude of clear laws, and as the Gentiles had the laws of nature, there could be no hope of escape from the charge of their violation. Since human nature was depraved, and men were prone to sin, the more just and reasonable the laws, the less hope was there of being justified by the law, and the more certainty was there that the law would produce wrath and condemnation.

(r) "law worketh wrath" Rom 5:20 (s) "no law is" 1Jn 3:4 Verse 16. Therefore. In view of the course of reasoning which has been pursued. We have come to this conclusion.

It is of faith. Justification is by faith; or the plan which God has devised of saving men is by faith, Rom 3:26.

That it might be by grace. As a matter of mere undeserved mercy. If men were justified by law, it would be by their own merits; now it is of mere unmerited favour.

To the end. For the purpose, or design.

The promise, Rom 4:13.

Might be sure. Might be firm, or established. On any other ground it could not be established. If it had depended on entire conformity to the law, the promise would never have been established, for none would have yielded such obedience. But now it may be secured to all the posterity of Abraham.

To all the seed. Rom 4:13.

Not to that only. Not to that part of his descendants alone who were Jews, or who had the law.

But to that, etc. To all who should possess the same faith as Abraham.

The father of us all. Of all who believe, whether they be Jews or Gentiles. Verse 17. As it is written. Gen 17:5.

I have made thee. The word here used in the Hebrew (Gen 17:5) means, literally, to give, to grant; and also, to set, or constitute. This is also the meaning of the Greek word used both by the Lxx. and the apostle. The quotation is taken literally from the Septuagint. The argument of the apostle is founded, in part, on the fact that the past tense is used---I have made thee--and that God spoke of a thing as already done, which he had promised or purposed to do. The sense is, he had, in his mind or purpose, constituted him the father of many nations; and so certain was the fulfillment of the Divine purposes, that he spoke of it as already accomplished.

Of many nations. The apostle evidently understands this promise as refering not to his natural descendants only, but to the great multitude who should believe as he did.

Before him. In his view or sight; i.e., god regarded him as such a father.

Whom he believed. Whose promise he believed; or in whom he trusted.

Who quickeneth the dead. Who gives life to the dead, Eph 2:1,5. This expresses the power of God to give life. But why it is used here has been a subject of debate. I regard it as having reference to the strong natural improbability of the fulfillment of the prophecy when it was given, arising from the age of Abraham and Sarah, Rom 4:19. Abraham exercise power in the God who gives life, and who gives it as he pleases. It is one of his prerogatives to give life to the dead (νεκρους) to raise up those who are in their graves; and a power similar to that, or strongly reminding of that, was manifested in fulfilling the promise to Abraham. The giving of the promise, and its fulfillment, were such as strongly to remind us that God has power to give life to the dead.

And calleth, etc. That is, those things which he foretells and promises are so certain, that he may speak of them as already in existence. Thus is relation to Abraham, God, instead of simply promising that he would make him the father of many nations, speaks of it as already done, "I have made thee," etc. In his own mind, or purpose, he had so constituted him, and it was so certain that it would take place, that he might speak of it as already done.

(t) "I have made thee a father" @Ge 17:5 (1) "before him whom" or, "like man" (u) "quickeneth the dead" Eph 2:1,5 (v) "those things" 1Cor 1:28, 1Pet 2:10 Verse 18. Who against hope. Who against all apparent or usual ground of hope. He refers here to the prospect of a posterity. See Rom 4:19-21.

Believed in hope. Believed in that which was promised to excite his hope. Hope here is put for the object of his hope--that which was promised.

According to that which was spoken. Gen 15:5.

So shall they seed be.. That is, as the stars in heaven for multitude. Thy posterity shall be very numerous.

(w) "So shall thy seed be" Gen 15:5 Verse 19. And being not weak in faith. That is, having strong faith.

He considered not. He did not regard the fact that his body was now dead, as any obstacle to the fulfilment of the promise. He did not suffer that fact to influence him, or to produce any doubt about the fulfilment. Faith looks to the strength of God, not to second causes, or to difficulties that may appear formidable to man.

Now dead. Aged; dead as to the purpose under consideration. Comp. Heb 11:12, "As good as dead." That is, he was now at an age when it was highly improbable that he would have any children. Comp. Gen 17:17.

Deadness, etc. Heb 11:11, "When she was past age." Comp. Gen 18:11.

(x) "deadness of Sarah's womb" Verse 20. He staggered not. He was not moved, or agitated; he steadily and firmly believed the promise.

Giving glory to God. Giving honour to God by the firmness with which he believed his promises. His conduct was such as to honour God; that is, to show Abraham's conviction that he was worthy of implicit confidence and trust. In this way all who believe in the promises of God do honour to him. They bear testimony to him that he is worthy of confidence. They become so many witnesses in his favour; and furnish to their fellow-men evidence that God has a claim on the credence and trust of mankind. Verse 21. And being fully persuaded. Thoroughly or entirely convinced, Lk 1:1, Rom 14:5, 2Ti 4:5,17.

He was able. Comp. Gen 18:14. This was not the only time in which Abraham evinced this confidence. His faith was equally implicit and strong when he was commanded to sacrifice his promised son, Heb 11:19.

(y) "also able to perform" Gen 18:14, Lk 1:37,45, Heb 11:19 Verse 22. And therefore, this faith was so implicit, and so unwavering, that it was a demonstration that he was the firm friend of God. He was tried, and he had such confidence in God that he showed that he was supremely attached to him, and would obey and serve him. This was reckoned as a full proof of friendship; and he was recognized and treated as righteous; i.e., as the friend of God. Rom 4:3,5. Verse 23. Now it was not written. The record of this extraordinary faith was not made on his account only; but it was made to show the way in which men may be regarded and treated as righteous by God. If Abraham was so regarded and treated, then, on the same principle, all others may be. God has but one mode of justifying men.

Imputed. Reckoned; accounted. He was regarded and treated as the friend of God.

(z) "Now it was not written" Rom 15:4, 1Cor 10:11 Verse 24. But for us also. For our use, comp. Rom 15:4, 1Cor 10:11 that we might have an example of the way in which men may be accepted of God. It is recorded for our encouragement and imitation, to show that we may in a similar manner be accepted and saved.

If we believe on him. etc. Abraham showed his faith in God by believing just what God revealed to him. This was his faith, and it might be as strong and implicit as could be exercised under the fullest revelation. Faith, now, is belief in God just so far as he has revealed his will to us. It is therefore the same in principle, though it may have reference to different objects. It is confidence in the same God, according to what we know of his will. Abraham showed his faith mainly in confiding in the promises of God respecting a numerous prosperity. This was the leading truth made know to him, and this he believed. The main or leading leading truths that God had made known to us are, that he has given his Son to die; that he has raised him up; and that through him he is ready to pardon. To put confidence in these truths is to believe now. Doing this, we believe in the same God that Abraham did; we evince the same spirit; and thus show that we are the friends of the same God, and may be treated in the same manner. This is faith under the gospel (comp. Mk 16:16), and shows that the faith of Abraham and of all true believers is substantially the same, and is varied only by the difference of the truths made known.

(a) "For us also" Acts 2:39 (b) "we believe on him" Mk 16:16, Jn 3:14-16 Verse 25. Who was delivered. To death. Comp. Acts 2:23.

For our offences. On account of our crimes. He was delivered up to death in order to make expiation for our sins.

And was raised again. From the dead.

For our justification. In order that we may be justified. The word justification here seems to be used in a large sense, to denote acceptance with God; including not merely the formal act by which God pardons sins, and by which we become reconciled to him, but but also the completion of the work--the treatment of us as righteous, and raising us up to a state of glory. By the death of Christ an atonement is made for sin. If it be asked how his resurrection contributes to our acceptance with God, we may answer,

(1.) It rendered his work complete. His death would have been unavailing, his work would have been imperfect, if he had not been raised up from the dead. He submitted to death as a sacrifice, and it was needful that he should rise, and thus conquer death and subdue our enemies, that the work which he had undertaken might be complete.

(2.) His resurrection was a proof that his work was accepted by the Father. What he had done, in order that sinners might be saved, was approved. Our justification, therefore become sure, as it was for this that he had given himself up to death.

(3.) His resurrection is the main-spring of all out hopes, and of all our efforts to be saved. Life and immortality are thus brought to light, 2Ti 1:10. God "hath begotten us again to a lively hope, (a living, active, real hope) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead," 1Pet 1:3. Thus the fact that he was raised becomes the ground of hope that we shall be raised and accepted of God. The fact that he was raised, and that all who love him shall be raised also, becomes one of the most efficient motives to us to seek to be justified and saved. There is no higher motive that can be presented to induce man to seek salvation than the fact that he may be raised up from death and the grave, and made immortal. There is no satisfactory proof that man can be thus raised up, but the resurrection of Jesus Christ. In that resurrection we have a pledge that all his people will rise. "For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him," 1Thes 4:14. "Because I live," said the Redeemer, "ye shall live also," Jn 14:19, 1Pet 1:21.