Rom 3:21-22, 25, 4:3, 6, 13, 9:30 | 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 3:21-22

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

Romans 3:25

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"

Romans 4:3

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

Romans 4:6

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.

Romans 4:13

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.

Romans 9:30

Verse 30. What shall we say then? What conclusion shall we draw from the previous train of remarks? To what results have we come by the passages adduced from the Old Testament? This question is asked prepatory to his summing up the argument; and he had so stated the argument that the conclusion which he was about to draw was inevitable.

The Gentiles. That many of the Gentiles; or that the way was open for them, and many of them had actually embraced the righteousness of faith. This epistle was written as late as the year 57, (see Introduction,) and at that time multitudes of heathens had embraced the Christian religion.

Which followed not after righteousness. The apostle does not mean that none of the pagans had any solicitude about right and wrong, or that there were no anxious inquiries among them; but he intends particularly to place them in contrast with the Jew. They had not made it their main object to justify themselves; they were not filled with prejudice and pride as the Jews were, who supposed that they had complied with the law, and who felt no need of any other justification; they were sinners, and they felt it, and had no such mighty obstacle in a system of self-righteousness to overcome as the Jew had. Still it was true that they were excessively wicked, and that the prevailing characteristic among them was that they did not follow after righteousness. See Rom 1:1 and following. The word "followed" here often denotes to pursue with intense energy, as a hunter pursues his game, or a man pursues a flying enemy. The Jews had sought righteousness in that way; the Gentiles had not. The word righteousness here means the same as justification. The Gentiles, which sought not justification, have obtained justification.

Have attained to righteousness, have become justified. This was a matter of fact; and this was what the prophet had predicted. The apostle does not say that the sins of the Gentiles, or their indifference to the subject, was any reason why God justified them, or that men would be as safe in sin as in attempting to seek for salvation. He establishes the doctrine, indeed, that God is a sovereign; but still it is implied that the gospel had not the peculiar obstacle to contend with among the Gentiles that it had among the Jews. There was less pride, obstinacy, self-confidence; and men were more easily brought to see that they were sinners, and to feel their need of a Saviour. Though God dispenses his favours as a sovereign, and though all are opposed by nature to the gospel, yet it is always true that the gospel finds more obstacles among some men than among others. This was a most cutting and humbling doctrine to the pride of a Jew; and it is no wonder, therefore, that the apostle guarded it as he did.

Which is of faith. Justification by faith in Christ. Rom 1:17,31.

(e) "the Gentiles" Rom 10:20 (f) "the righteousness which is of faith" Rom 1:17, Php 3:9