Rom 3:2, 5 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 2. Much every way . Or, in every respect. This is the answer of the apostle to the objection in . Chiefly . That is, this is the principal advantage, and one including all others. The main benefit of being a Jew is to possess the sacred Scriptures, and their instructions. Unto them were committed . Or were entrusted, were confided . The word translated "were committed," is that which is commonly employed to express faith or confidence , and it implied confidence in them on the part of God in entrusting his oracles to them; a confidence which was not misplaced, for no people ever guarded a sacred trust or deposit with more fidelity, than the Jews did the sacred Scriptures. The oracles . The word oracle among the heathen meant, properly, the answer or response of a god, or of some priest supposed to be inspired, to an inquiry of importance, usually expressed in a brief, sententious way, and often with great ambiguity. The place from which such a response was usually obtained was also called an oracle , as the oracle at Delphi , etc. These oracles were frequent among the heathen, and affairs of great importance were usually submitted to them. The word rendered oracles occurs in the New Testament but four times, ; . It is evidently here used to denote the Scriptures, as being that which was spoken by God, and particularly perhaps the Divine promises. To possess these was, of course, an eminent privilege, and included all others, as they instructed them in their duty, and were their guide in everything that pertained to them in this life and the life to come. They contained, besides, many precious promises respecting the future dignity of the nation ill reference to the Messiah. No higher favour can be conferred on a people than to be put in possession of the sacred Scriptures. And this fact should excite us to gratitude, and lead us to endeavour to extend them also to other nations. Comp. .

Romans 3:2

Verse 2. Much every way. Or, in every respect. This is the answer of the apostle to the objection in Rom 3:1.

Chiefly. That is, this is the principal advantage, and one including all others. The main benefit of being a Jew is to possess the sacred Scriptures, and their instructions.

Unto them were committed. Or were entrusted, were confided. The word translated "were committed," is that which is commonly employed to express faith or confidence, and it implied confidence in them on the part of God in entrusting his oracles to them; a confidence which was not misplaced, for no people ever guarded a sacred trust or deposit with more fidelity, than the Jews did the sacred Scriptures.

The oracles. The word oracle among the heathen meant, properly, the answer or response of a god, or of some priest supposed to be inspired, to an inquiry of importance, usually expressed in a brief, sententious way, and often with great ambiguity. The place from which such a response was usually obtained was also called an oracle, as the oracle at Delphi, etc. These oracles were frequent among the heathen, and affairs of great importance were usually submitted to them. The word rendered oracles occurs in the New Testament but four times, Acts 7:38, Heb 5:12, 1Pet 4:11; Rom 3:2. It is evidently here used to denote the Scriptures, as being that which was spoken by God, and particularly perhaps the Divine promises. To possess these was, of course, an eminent privilege, and included all others, as they instructed them in their duty, and were their guide in everything that pertained to them in this life and the life to come. They contained, besides, many precious promises respecting the future dignity of the nation ill reference to the Messiah. No higher favour can be conferred on a people than to be put in possession of the sacred Scriptures. And this fact should excite us to gratitude, and lead us to endeavour to extend them also to other nations. Comp. De 4:7,8, Ps 147:19,20.

Romans 3:5

Verse 5. But if our unrighteousness. If our sin The particular sin which had been specified Rom 3:3 was unbelief. But the apostle here gives the objection a general form. This is to be regarded as an objection which a Jew might take. The force of it is this:

(1) It had been conceded that some had not believed; that is, had sinned.

(2) But God was true to his promises. Notwithstanding their sin, God's character was the same. Nay,

(3) in the very midst of sin, and as one of the results of it, the character of God as a just Being shone out illustriously. The question then was,

(4.) if his glory resulted from it; if the effect of all was to show that his character was pure, how could he punish that sin from which his own glory resulted? And this is a question which is often asked by sinners.

Commend. Recommend; show forth; render illustrious.

The righteousness of God. His just and holy character. This was the effect on David's mind, that he saw more clearly the justice of God in his threatenings against sin, in consequence of his own transgression. And if this effect followed, if honour was thus done to God, the question was, how he could consistently punish that which tended to promote his own glory?

What shall we say? What follows? or, what is the inference? This is a mode of speech as if the objector hesitated about expressing an inference which would seem to follow, but which was horrible in its character. Is God unrighteous? The meaning of this would be better expressed thus: "Is not God unrighteous in punishing? Does it not follow, that if God is honoured by sin, that it would be wrong for him to inflict punishment?"

Who taketh vengeance. The meaning of this is simply, who inflicts punishment. The idea of vengeance is not necessarily in the original, οργην. It is commonly rendered wrath, but it often means simply punishment, with out any reference to the state of the mind of him who inflicts it. Mt 3:7, Lk 3:7, 21:23, Jn 3:36. Rom 1:18; Rom 4:15.

I speak as a man. I speak after the manner of men. I speak as appears to be the case to human view; or as would strike the human mind. It does not mean that the language was such as wicked men were accustomed to use; but that the objector expressed a sentiment which to human view would seem to follow from what had been said. This I regard as the language of an objector. It implies a degree of reverence for the character of God, and a seeming unwillingness to state an objection which seemed to be dishonourable to God, but which nevertheless pressed itself so strong on the mind as to appear irresistible. No way of stating the objection could have been more artful or impressive.