Rom 9, Eph 1 | Barnes | STEP | ROMANS Chapter 9 Introduction THIS chapter opens, in some degree, a new train of thought and argumentation. Its main design probably was to meet objections which would be alleged against the positions advanced and defended in the previous parts of the epistle. In the previous chapters, Paul had defended the position, that the barrier between the Jews and Gentiles had been removed; that the Jews could not be saved by any external advantages which they possessed; that all were alike guilty before God; and that there was but one way for Jews and Gentiles of salvation--by faith in Jesus Christ, chapters 1-3. He had stated the benefits of this plan, (chap. 5.,) and showed its bearing in accomplishing what the law of Moses could not effect in overcoming sin, chap. 6,7. In chap. 8. he had stated also on what principles this was clone; that it was according to the purpose of God--the principle of electing mercy applied indiscriminately to the mass of guilty Jews and Gentiles. To this statement two objections might arise: first, that it was unjust; and second, that the whole argument involved a departure from the promises made to the Jewish nation. It might further be supposed that the apostle had ceased to feel an interest in his countrymen, and had become the exclusive advocate of the Gentiles. To meet these objections and feelings seems to have been the design of this chapter. He shows them, (1.) his unabated love for his countrymen, and regard for their welfare, ( ) (2.) He shows them, from their own writings, that the principle of election had existed in former times--in the case of Isaac, ( ) in the writings of Moses, ( ) in the case of Pharaoh, ( ) and in the prophecies of Hosea and Isaiah, ( .) (3.) He takes occasion, throughout the chapter, to vindicate this principle of the Divine administration; to answer objections; and to show that, on the acknowledged principles of the Old Testament, a part of the Jewish nation might be rejected; and that it was the purpose of God to call others to the privileges of the people of God, . The chapter, therefore, has not reference to national election, or to choice to external privileges, but has direct reference to the doctrine of the election to salvation which had been stated in chap. 8. To suppose that it refers merely to external privileges, and national distinctions, makes the whole discussion unconnected, unmeaning, and unnecessary. Verse 1. I say the truth . In what I am about to affirm respecting my attachment to the nation and people. In Christ . Most interpreters regard this as a form of an oath, as equivalent to calling Christ to witness. It is certainly to be regarded, in its obvious sense, as an appeal to Christ as the searcher of the heart, and as the judge of falsehood. Thus the word translated "in" (εν) is used in the form of an oath in , Greek. We are to remember that the apostle was addressing those who had been Jews; and the expression has all the force of an oath by the Messiah . This shows that it is right , on great and solemn occasions, and in a solemn manner, AND THUS ONLY, to appeal to Christ for the sincerity of our motives, and for the truth of what we say. And it shows, further, that it is right to regard the Lord Jesus Christ as present with us, as searching the heart, as capable of detecting insincerity, hypocrisy, and perjury, and as therefore Divine. My conscience . Conscience is that act of judgment of the mind by which we decide on the lawfulness or unlawfulness of our actions, and by which we instantly approve or condemn them. It exists in every man, and is a strong witness to our integrity or to our guilt. Bearing me witness . Testifying to the truth of what I say. In the Holy Ghost . He does not say that he speaks the truth by or in the Holy Ghost, as he had said of Christ; but that the conscience pronounced its concurring testimony by the Holy Ghost; that is, conscience as enlightened and influenced by the Holy Ghost. It was not simply natural conscience, but it was conscience under the full influence of the Enlightener of the mind and Sanctifier of the heart. The reasons of this solemn asseveration are probably the following: (1.) His conduct and his doctrines had led some to believe that he was an apostate, and had lost his love for his countrymen. He had forsaken their institutions, and devoted himself to the salvation of the Gentiles. He here shows them that it was from no want of love to them. (2.) The doctrines which he was about to state and defend were of a similar character; he was about to maintain that no small part of his own countrymen, notwithstanding their privileges, would be rejected and lost. In this solemn manner, therefore, he assures them that this doctrine had not been embraced because: he did not love them, but because it was solemn, though most painful-truth. He proceeds to enumerate their privileges as a people, and to show to them the strength and tenderness of his love.

Romans 9

ROMANS Chapter 9 Introduction

THIS chapter opens, in some degree, a new train of thought and argumentation. Its main design probably was to meet objections which would be alleged against the positions advanced and defended in the previous parts of the epistle. In the previous chapters, Paul had defended the position, that the barrier between the Jews and Gentiles had been removed; that the Jews could not be saved by any external advantages which they possessed; that all were alike guilty before God; and that there was but one way for Jews and Gentiles of salvation--by faith in Jesus Christ, chapters 1-3. He had stated the benefits of this plan, (chap. 5.,) and showed its bearing in accomplishing what the law of Moses could not effect in overcoming sin, chap. 6,7. In chap. 8. he had stated also on what principles this was clone; that it was according to the purpose of God--the principle of electing mercy applied indiscriminately to the mass of guilty Jews and Gentiles. To this statement two objections might arise: first, that it was unjust; and second, that the whole argument involved a departure from the promises made to the Jewish nation. It might further be supposed that the apostle had ceased to feel an interest in his countrymen, and had become the exclusive advocate of the Gentiles. To meet these objections and feelings seems to have been the design of this chapter. He shows them,

(1.) his unabated love for his countrymen, and regard for their welfare, (Rom 9:1-5)

(2.) He shows them, from their own writings, that the principle of election had existed in former times--in the case of Isaac, (Rom 9:7-13) in the writings of Moses, (Rom 9:15) in the case of Pharaoh, (Rom 9:17) and in the prophecies of Hosea and Isaiah, (Rom 9:25-29.)

(3.) He takes occasion, throughout the chapter, to vindicate this principle of the Divine administration; to answer objections; and to show that, on the acknowledged principles of the Old Testament, a part of the Jewish nation might be rejected; and that it was the purpose of God to call others to the privileges of the people of God, Rom 9:16,19-23,25,26,29-33. The chapter, therefore, has not reference to national election, or to choice to external privileges, but has direct reference to the doctrine of the election to salvation which had been stated in chap. 8. To suppose that it refers merely to external privileges, and national distinctions, makes the whole discussion unconnected, unmeaning, and unnecessary.

Verse 1. I say the truth. In what I am about to affirm respecting my attachment to the nation and people.

In Christ. Most interpreters regard this as a form of an oath, as equivalent to calling Christ to witness. It is certainly to be regarded, in its obvious sense, as an appeal to Christ as the searcher of the heart, and as the judge of falsehood. Thus the word translated "in" (εν) is used in the form of an oath in Mt 5:34-36, Rev 10:6, Greek. We are to remember that the apostle was addressing those who had been Jews; and the expression has all the force of an oath by the Messiah. This shows that it is right, on great and solemn occasions, and in a solemn manner, AND THUS ONLY, to appeal to Christ for the sincerity of our motives, and for the truth of what we say. And it shows, further, that it is right to regard the Lord Jesus Christ as present with us, as searching the heart, as capable of detecting insincerity, hypocrisy, and perjury, and as therefore Divine.

My conscience. Conscience is that act of judgment of the mind by which we decide on the lawfulness or unlawfulness of our actions, and by which we instantly approve or condemn them. It exists in every man, and is a strong witness to our integrity or to our guilt.

Bearing me witness. Testifying to the truth of what I say.

In the Holy Ghost. He does not say that he speaks the truth by or in the Holy Ghost, as he had said of Christ; but that the conscience pronounced its concurring testimony by the Holy Ghost; that is, conscience as enlightened and influenced by the Holy Ghost. It was not simply natural conscience, but it was conscience under the full influence of the Enlightener of the mind and Sanctifier of the heart. The reasons of this solemn asseveration are probably the following:

(1.) His conduct and his doctrines had led some to believe that he was an apostate, and had lost his love for his countrymen. He had forsaken their institutions, and devoted himself to the salvation of the Gentiles. He here shows them that it was from no want of love to them.

(2.) The doctrines which he was about to state and defend were of a similar character; he was about to maintain that no small part of his own countrymen, notwithstanding their privileges, would be rejected and lost. In this solemn manner, therefore, he assures them that this doctrine had not been embraced because: he did not love them, but because it was solemn, though most painful-truth. He proceeds to enumerate their privileges as a people, and to show to them the strength and tenderness of his love. Verse 2. Great heaviness. Great grief.

Continual sorrow. The word rendered continual here must be taken in a popular sense. Not that he was literally all the time pressed down with this sorrow, but that whenever he thought on this subject he had great grief; as we say of a painful subject, it is a source of constant pain. The cause of this grief, Paul does not expressly mention, though it is implied in what he immediately says. It was the fact that so large a part of the nation would be rejected and cast off. Verse 3. For I could wish, etc. This passage has been greatly controverted. Some have proposed to translate it, "I did wish," as referring to a former state, when he renounced Christ, and sought to advance the interests of the nation by opposing and defying him. But to this interpretation there are insuperable objections.

(1.) The object of the apostle is not to state his former feelings, but his present attachment to his countrymen, and willingness to suffer for them.

(2.) The proper grammatical construction of the word used here is not I did wish, but I could desire; that is, if the thing were possible. It is not I do wish, or did wish, but I could desire, (ηυχομην) implying that he was willing now to endure it; that his present love for them was so strong, that he would, if practicable, save them from the threatened ruin and apostasy.

(3.) It is not true that Paul ever did wish before his conversion to be accursed by Christ, i.e. by the Messiah. He opposed Jesus of Nazareth; but he did not believe that he was the Messiah. At no time would he have wished to be devoted to destruction by the Messiah, or by Christ. Nothing would have been more terrible to a Jew; and Saul of Tarsus never doubted that he was the friend of the promised Messiah, and was advancing the true interests of his cause, and defending the hopes of his nation against an impostor. The word, therefore, expresses a feeling which the apostle had, when writing this epistle, in regard to the condition and prospects of the nation.

Were accursed from Christ. Might be anathema by Christ (αναθεμαειναιαποτουχριστου). This passage has been much controverted. The word rendered accursed (anathema) properly means,

(1.) anything that was set up, or set apart, or consecrated to the gods in the temples, as spoils of war, images, statues, etc. This is its classical Greek meaning. It has a similar meaning among the Hebrews. It denoted that which was set apart or consecrated to the service of God, as sacrifices or offerings of any kind. In this respect it is used to express the sense of the Hebrew word , anything devoted to Jehovah, without the possibility of redemption, Lev 27:21,28,29 Nu 18:14, De 7:26, Josh 6:17,18, 7:1, 1Sam 15:21, Eze 44:29.

(2.) As that which was thus dedicated to Jehovah was alienated from the use of him who devoted it, and was either burnt or slain, and devoted to destruction as an offering, the word came to signify a devotion of anything to destruction, or to complete ruin. And as whatever is devoted to destruction may be said to be subject to a curse, or to be accursed, the word comes to have this signification, 1Kgs 20:42; Isa 34:5. But in none of these cases does it denote eternal death. The idea, therefore, in these places is simply, "I could be willing to be destroyed, or devoted to death, for the sake of my countrymen." And the apostle evidently means to say that he would be willing to suffer the bitterest evils, to forego all pleasure, to endure any privation and toil, nay, to offer his life, so that he might be wholly devoted to sufferings, as an offering, if he might be the means of benefiting and saving the nation. For a similar case, see Ex 32:32. This does not mean that Paul would be willing to be damned for ever. For,

(1.) the words do not imply that, and will not bear it.

(2.) Such a destruction could in no conceivable way benefit the Jews.

(3.) Such a willingness is not and cannot be required. And,

(4.) it would be impious and absurd. No man has a right to be willing to be the eternal enemy of God; and no man ever yet was, or could be, willing to endure everlasting torments.

From Christ. By Christ. Grotius thinks it means from the church of Christ. Others think it means "after the example of Christ;" and others, from Christ for ever. But it evidently means that he was willing to be devoted by Christ; i.e. to be regarded by him, and appointed by him, to suffering and death, if by that means he could save his countrymen. It was thus the highest expression of true patriotism and benevolence. It was an example for all Christians and Christian ministers. They should be willing to be devoted to pain, privation, toil, and death, if by that they could save others from ruin.

My kinsmen, etc. My countrymen; all of whom he regarded as his kinsmen, or relations, as descended from the same ancestors.

According to the flesh. By birth. They were of the same blood and parentage, though not now of the same religious belief.

(w) "could wish" Ex 32:32 (1) "accursed" or, "separated" Verse 4. Who are Israelites. Descended from Israel, or Jacob; honoured by having such an ancestor, and by bearing a name so distinguished as that of his descendants. It was formerly the honourable appellation of the people of God.

To whom pertaineth. To whom it belongs. It was their elevated external privilege.

The adoption. Of the nation into the family of God, or to be regarded as his peculiar people, De 7:6.

And the glory. The symbol of the Divine presence that attended them from Egypt, and that finally rested over the ark in the first temple --the Shekinah, Ex 13:21,22, 25:22.

And the covenants. The various compacts or promises which had been made from time to time with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and with the nation; the pledges of the Divine protection.

The giving of the law. On Mount Sinai, Ex 20:1. Comp. Ps 147:19.

And the service of God. The temple service; regarded by them as the pride and ornament of their nation.

And the promises. Of the Messiah; and of the spread of the true religion from them as a nation.

(x) "adoption" De 7:6 (y) "glory" Ps 90:16, Isa 60:19 (1) "covenants" or, "testaments" (z) "covenants" Gen 17:2, De 29:14, Jer 31:33 (a) "law" Ps 147:19, Rom 3:2 (b) "service of God" Ex 12:25 (c) "promises" Eph 2:12 Verse 5. Whose are the fathers. Who have been honoured with so illustrious an ancestry. Who are descended from Abraham, Isaac, etc. On this they highly valued themselves, and, in a certain sense, not unjustly. Comp. Mt 3:9.

Of whom. Of whose nation. This is placed as the crowning and most exalted privilege, that their nation had given birth to the long-expected Messiah, the hope of the world.

As concerning the flesh. So far as his human nature was concerned. The use of this language supposes that there was a higher nature, in respect to which he was not of their nation. Rom 1:3.

Christ came. He had already come; and it was their high honour that he was one of their nation.

Who is over all. This is an appellation that belongs only to the true God. It implies supreme Divinity; and is full proof that the Messiah is Divine. Much effort has been made to show that this is not the true rendering, but without success. There are no various readings in the Greek MSS. of any consequence; and the connexion here evidently requires us to understand this of a nature that is not "according to the flesh," i.e., as the apostle here shows, of the Divine nature.

God blessed for ever. This is evidently applied to the Lord Jesus; and it proves that he is Divine. If the translation is fairly made,--and it has never been proved to be erroneous,--it demonstrates that he is God as well as man. The doxology "blessed for ever" was usually added by the Jewish writers after the mention of the name God, as an expression of reverence. (See the various interpretations that have been proposed on this passage examined in Prof Stuart's Notes on this verse.)

(d) "fathers" Rom 11:28 (e) "as concerning" Lk 3:23 (f) "is over all" Jn 1:1 Verse 6. Not as though, etc. Not as though the promise of God had entirely failed. Though I grieve thus, (Rom 9:2,3) though I am deeply apprehensive for the nation, yet I do not affirm that all the nation is to be destroyed. The promise of God will not entirely fail.

Not all Israel. Not all the descendants of Jacob have the true spirit of Israelites, or are Jews in the scriptural sense of the term. Rom 2:28,29.

(g) "none effect" Isa 55:11 (h) "for they are not" Rom 2:28,29 Verse 7. Are they all children. Adopted into the true family of God. Many of the descendants of Abraham were rejected.

But in Isaac. This was the promise, Gen 21:12.

Shall thy seed, etc. Thy true people. This implied a selection, or choice; and, therefore, the doctrine of election was illustrated in the very commencement of the history of the nation; and as God had then made such a distinction, he might still do it. As he had then rejected a part of the natural descendants of Abraham, so he might, still do it. This is the argument which the apostle is pursuing.

(i) "In Isaac" Isa 55:11 Verse 8. They which are the children of the flesh. The natural descendants.

These are not the children of God. Are not of necessity the adopted children of God; or are not so in virtue of their descent merely. This was in opposition to one of the most settled and deeply-cherished opinions of the Jews. They supposed that the mere fact of being a Jew entitled a man to the blessings of the covenant, and to be regarded as a child of God. But the apostle shows them that it was not by their natural descent that these spiritual privileges were granted; that they were not conferred on men simply from the fact that they were Jews; and that consequently those who were not Jews might become interested in those spiritual blessings.

But the children of the promise. The descendants of Abraham on whom the promised blessings would be bestowed. The sense is, that God at first contemplated a distinction among the descendants of Abraham, and intended to confine his blessings to such as he chose; that is, to those to whom the promise particularly appertained, to the descendants of Isaac. The argument of the apostle is, that the principle was thus established that a distinction might be made among those who were Jews; and as that distinction had been made in former times, so it might be under the Messiah.

Are counted. Are regarded, or reckoned. God reckons things as they are; and therefore designed that they should be his true children.

As the seed. The spiritual children of God; the partakers of his mercy and salvation. This refers, doubtless, to spiritual privileges and to salvation; and therefore has relation not to nations as such, but to individuals.

(k) "children of the promise" Gal 4:28 Verse 9. For this is the word of promise. This is the promise made to Abraham. The design of the apostle, in introducing this, is doubtless to show to whom the promise appertained; and by specifying this, he shows that it had not reference to Ishmael, but to Isaac.

At this time. Greek, According to this time. See Gen 8:10,14. Probably it means at the exact time promised; I will fulfil the prediction at the very time. Comp. 2Kgs 4:16.

(l) "At this time" Gen 18:10,14 Verse 10. And not only this. Not only is the principle of making a distinction among the natural descendants of Abraham thus settled by the promise, but it is still further seen and illustrated in the birth of the two sons of Isaac. He had shown that the principle of thus making a distinction among the posterity of Abraham was recognized in the original promise, thus proving that all the descendants of Abraham were not of course to be saved; and he now proceeds to show that the principle was recognized in the case of his posterity in the family of Isaac. And he shows that it is not according to any natural principles that the selection was made; that he not only made a distinction between Jacob and Esau, but that he did it according to his good pleasure, choosing the younger to be the object of his favour, and rejecting the elder, who, according to the custom of the times, was supposed to be entitled to peculiar honour and rights. And, in order to prove that this was done according to his own pleasure, he shows that the distinction was made before they were born; before they had formed any character; and, consequently, in such a way that it could not be pretended that it was in consequence of any works which they had performed.

But when Rebecca. The wife of Isaac. See Gen 25:21,23.

(m) "Rebecca" Gen 25:21,23 Verse 11. For the children being not yet born. It was not, therefore, by any works of theirs. It was not because they had formed a character and manifested qualities which made this distinction proper. It was laid back of any such character, and therefore had its foundation in the purpose or plan of God.

Neither having done any good or evil. That is, when the declaration (Rom 9:12) was made to Rebecca. This is a very important passage in regard to the question about the purposes of God.

(1.) They had done nothing good or bad; and when that is the case, there can be, properly speaking, no moral character, for "a character is not formed when the person has not acquired stable and distinctive qualities." Webster.

(2.) That the period of moral agency had not yet commenced. Comp. Gen 25:22,23. When that agency commences we do not know; but here is a case of which it is affirmed that it had not commenced.

(3.) The purpose of God is antecedent to the formation of character, or the performance of any actions, good or bad.

(4.) It is not a purpose formed because he sees anything in the individuals as a ground for his choice, but for some reason which he has not explained, and which in the Scripture is simply called purpose, and good pleasure, Eph 1:5.

(5.) If it existed in this case, it does in others. If it was right then, it is now. And if God then dispensed his favours on this principle, he will now. But

(6) this affirmation respecting Jacob and Esau does not prove that they had not a nature inclined to evil; or a corrupt and sensual propensity; or that they would not sin as soon as they became moral agents. It proves merely that they had not yet committed actual sin. That they, as well as all others, would certainly sin as soon as they committed moral acts at all, is proved everywhere in the sacred Scriptures.

The purpose of God. Rom 8:28.

According to election. To dispense his favours according to his sovereign will and pleasure. Those favours were not conferred in consequence of the merits of the individuals, but according to a wise plan lying back of the formation of their characters, and before they had done good or evil. The favours were thus conferred according to his choice, or election.

Might stand. Might be confirmed; or might be proved to be true. The case shows that God dispenses his favours as a sovereign. The purpose of God was thus proved to have been formed without respect to the merits of either.

Not of works. Not by anything which they had done either to merit his favour or to forfeit it. It was formed on other principles than a reference to their works. So it is in relation to all who shall be saved. God has good reasons for saving those who shall be saved. What the reasons are for choosing some to life he has not revealed; but he has revealed to us that it is not on account of their works, either performed or foreseen.

But of him that calleth. According to the will and purpose of him that chooses to dispense those favours in this manner. It is not by the merit of man, but it is by a purpose having its origin with God, and formed and executed according to his good pleasure. It is also implied here, that it is formed in such a way as to secure his glory as the primary consideration. Verse 12. It was said unto her. By Jehovah. See Gen 25:23.

The elder. The eldest son, which was Esau. By the law of primogeniture among the Hebrews, he would have been entitled to peculiar honours and privileges. But it was said that in his case this custom should be reversed, and that he should take the rank of the younger.

Should serve. Shall be subject to; shall not have the authority and priority, but should be inferior to. The passage in Gen 25:23 shows that this had reference particularly to the posterity of Esau, and not to him as an individual. The sense is, that the descendants of Esau, who were Edomites, should be inferior to, and subject to the descendants of Jacob. Jacob was to have the priority; the promised land; the promises; and the honour of being regarded as the chosen of God. There was reference here, therefore, to the whole train of temporal and spiritual blessings which were to be connected with the two races of people. If it be asked how this bears on the argument of the apostle, we may reply,

(1.) that it settles the principle that God might make a distinction among men, in the same nation, and the same family, without reference to their works or character.

(2.) That he might confer his blessings on such as he pleased.

(3.) If this is done in regard to nations, it may be in regard to individuals. The principle is the same, and the justice the same. If it be supposed to be unjust in God to make such a distinction in regard to individuals, it is surely not less so to make a distinction in nations. The fact that numbers are thus favoured does not make it the more proper, or remove any difficulty.

(4.) If this distinction may be made in regard to temporal things, why not in regard to spiritual things? The principle must still be the same. If unjust in one case, it would be in the other. The fact that it is done in one case proves also that it will be in the other; for the same great principle will run through all the dealings of the Divine government. And as men do not and cannot complain that God makes a distinction among them in regard to talents, health, beauty, prosperity, and rank, neither can they complain if he acts also as a sovereign in the distribution of his spiritual favours. They, therefore, who regard this as referring only to temporal and national privileges, gain no relief in respect to the real difficulty in the case, for the unanswerable question would still be asked, why has not God made all men equal in everything? Why has he made any distinction among men? The only reply to all such inquiries is, "Even so, Father, for so it seemeth good in thy sight," Mt 11:26.

(1) "elder" or, "greater" (2) "younger" or, "lesser" Verse 13. As it is written. Mal 1:2,3. That is, the distribution of favours is on the principle advanced by the prophet, and is in accordance with the declaration that God had, in fact, loved the one and hated the other.

Jacob. This refers, doubtless, to the posterity of Jacob.

Have I loved. I have shown affection for that people; I have bestowed on them great privileges and blessings, as proofs of attachment. I have preferred Jacob to Esau.

Esau. The descendants of Esau, the Edomites. See Mal 1:4.

Have I hated. This does not mean any positive hatred; but that he had preferred Jacob, and had withheld from Esau those privileges and blessings which he had conferred on the posterity of Jacob. This is explained in Mal 1:3, "And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness," Comp. Jer 49:17,18, Eze 35:3. It was common among the Hebrews to use the terms love and hatred in this comparative sense, where the former implied strong positive attachment, and the latter, not positive hatred, but merely as a less love, or the withholding of the expressions of affection. Comp. Gen 29:30,31, Prov 13:24. "He that spareth his rod hateth his son; but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes." Mt 6:24. "No man can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other," etc. Lk 14:26, "If any man come to me, and hate not his father and mother," etc.

(n) "Jacob" Mal 1:2,3 Verse 14. What shall we say then? What conclusion shall we draw from these acknowledged facts, and from these positive declarations of Scripture?

Is there unrighteousness with God? Does God do injustice or wrong? This charge has often been brought against the doctrine here advanced. But this charge the apostle strongly repels. He meets it by further showing that it is the doctrine explicitly taught in the Old Testament, (Rom 9:15,17,) and that it is founded on the principles of equity, and on just views of the sovereignty of God, Rom 9:19-23.

God forbid. Rom 3:4.

(o) "unrighteousness" De 32:4 Verse 15. For he saith to Moses. Ex 33:19.

I will have mercy. This is said by God when he declared expressly that he would make all his goodness pass before Moses, (Ex 33:19) and when, therefore, it was regarded not as a proof of stern and inexorable justice, but as the very proof of his benevolence, and the highest which he thought proper to exhibit. When men, therefore, under the influence of an unrenewed and hostile heart, charge this as an unjust and arbitrary proceeding, they are resisting and perverting that which God regards as the very demonstration of his benevolence. The sense of the passage clearly is, that he would choose the objects of his favour, and bestow his mercies as he chose. None of the human race deserved his favour; and he had a right to pardon whom he pleased, and to save men on his own terms, and according to his sovereign will and pleasure.

On whom I will have mercy. On whom I choose to bestow mercy. The mode he does not explain. But there could not be a more positive declaration of these truths,

(1.) that he does it as a sovereign, without giving an account of the reason of his choice to any.

(2.) That he does it without regard to any claim on the part of man; or that man is regarded as destitute of merit, and as having no right to his mercy.

(3.) That he will do it to any extent which he pleases, and in whatever time and manner may best accord with his own good pleasure.

(4.) That he has regard to a definite number; and that on that number he intends to bestow eternal life; and,

(5.) that no one has a right to complain. It is proof of his benevolence that any are saved; and where none have a claim, where all are justly condemned, he has a right to pardon whom he pleases. The executive of a country may select any number of criminals whom he may see fit to pardon, or in consistency with the supremacy of the laws and the welfare of the community, and none has a right to murmur; but every good citizen should rejoice that any may be pardoned with safety. So in the moral world, and under the administration of its holy Sovereign, it should be a matter of joy that any can be pardoned and saved; and not a subject of murmuring and complaint that those who shall finally deserve to die shall be consigned to woe.

(p) "I will have mercy" Ex 33:19 Verse 16. So then. It follows as a consequence from this statement of God to Moses. Or, it is a doctrine established by that statement.

Not of him that willeth. This does not mean that he that becomes a Christian, and is saved, does not choose eternal life; or is not made willing; or that he is compelled to enter heaven against his own choice. It is true that men by nature have no desire of holiness, and do not choose eternal life. But the effect of the influences of God's Spirit on the heart is to make it "willing in the day of his power," Ps 110:3. The meaning here is, evidently, that eternal life is not bestowed because man had any original willingness or disposition to be saved; it is not because he commences the work, and is himself disposed to it; but it is because God inclines him to it, and disposes him to seek for mercy, and then confers it in his own way. The word willeth here denotes wish or desire.

Nor of him that runneth. This denotes strenuous, intense effort, as when a man is anxious to obtain an object, or hastens from danger. The meaning is not that the sinner does not make an effort to be saved; nor that all who become Christians do not in fact strive to enter into the kingdom, or earnestly desire salvation; for the Scriptures teach the contrary, Lk 16:16; 13:24. There is no effort more intense and persevering, no struggle more arduous or agonizing, than when a sinner seeks eternal life. Nor does it mean that they who strive in a proper way, and with proper effort, shall not obtain eternal life, Mt 7:7. But the sense is,

(1.) that the sinner would not put forth any effort himself. If left to his own course he would never seek to be saved.

(2.) That he is pardoned, not on account of his effort; not because he makes an exertion; but because God chooses to pardon him. There is no merit in his anxiety, and prayers, and agony, on account of which God would forgive him; but he is still dependent on the mere mercy of God to save or destroy him at his will. The sinner, however anxious he may be, and however much or long he may strive, does not bring God under an obligation to pardon him, anymore than the condemned criminal, trembling with the fear of execution, and the consciousness of crime, lays the judge or the jury under an obligation to acquit him. This fact it is of great importance for an awakened sinner to know. Deeply anxious he should be, but there is no merit in his distress. Pray he should, but there is no merit in his prayers. Weep and strive he may, but in this there is no ground of claim on God for pardon; and, after all, he is dependent on his mere sovereign mercy, as a lost, ruined, and helpless sinner, to be saved or lost at his will.

But of God that sheweth mercy. Salvation, in its beginning, its progress, and its close, is of him. He has a right, therefore, to bestow it when and where he pleases. All our mercies flow from his mere love and compassion, and not from our deserts. The essential idea here is, that God is the original fountain of all the blessings of salvation. Verse 17. For the Scripture saith. Ex 9:16. That is, God saith to Pharaoh in the Scriptures, Gal 3:8,22. This passage is designed to illustrate the doctrine that God shows mercy according to his sovereign pleasure by a reference to one of the most extraordinary cases of hardness of heart which has ever occurred. The design is to show that God has a right to pass by those to whom he does not choose to show mercy; and to place them in circumstances where they shall develop their true character, and where in fact they shall become more hardened and be destroyed, Rom 9:18.

Unto Pharaoh. The haughty and oppressive king of Egypt: thus showing that the most mighty and wicked monarchs are at his control. Comp. Isa 10:5-7.

For this same purpose, for the design, or with the intent that is immediately specified. This was the leading purpose or design of his sustaining him.

Have I raised thee up. Margin, in Ex 9:16, "made thee stand," i.e. sustained thee. The Greek word used by the apostle (εξηγειρα) means, properly, I have excited, roused, or stirred thee up; but it may also have the meaning, "I have sustained or supported thee." That is, I have kept thee from death; I have preserved thee from ruin; I have ministered strength to thee, so that thy full character has been developed. It does not mean that God had infused into his mind any positive evil, or that by any direct influence he had excited any evil feelings, but that he had kept him in circumstances which were fitted to develop his true character. The meaning of the word and the truth of the case may be expressed in the following particulars:

(1.) God meant to accomplish some great purposes by his existence and conduct.

(2.) He kept him, or sustained him, with reference to that.

(3.) He had control over the haughty and wicked monarch. He could take his life, or he could continue him on earth. As he had control over all things that could affect the pride, the feelings, and the happiness of the monarch, so he had control over the monarch himself.

(4.) He placed him in circumstances just fitted to develop his character. He kept him amidst those circumstances until his character was fully developed.

(5.) He did not exert a positive influence on the mind of Pharaoh; for,

(6.) in all this the monarch acted freely. He did that which he chose to do. He pursued his own course. He was voluntary in his schemes of oppressing the Israelites. He was voluntary in his opposition to God. He was voluntary when he pursued the Israelites to the Red Sea. In all his doings he acted as he chose to do, and with a determined choice of evil, from which neither warning nor judgment would turn him away. Thus he is said to have hardened his own heart, Ex 8:15.

(7.) Neither Pharaoh nor any sinner can justly blame God for placing them in circumstances where they shall develop their own character, and show what they are. It is not the fault of God, but their own fault. The sinner is not compelled to sin; nor is God under obligation to save him contrary to the prevalent desires and wishes of the sinner himself.

My power in thee. Or, by means of thee, By the judgments exerted in delivering an entire oppressed people from thy grasp. God's most signal acts of power were thus shown in consequence of his disobedience and rebellion.

My name. The name of Jehovah, as the only true God, and the deliverer of his people.

Throughout all the earth. Or throughout all the land of Egypt. Lk 2:1. We may learn here,

(1.) that a leading design of God in the government of the world is to make his power, and name, and character known.

(2.) That this is often accomplished in a most signal manner by the destruction of the wicked.

(3.) That wicked men should be alarmed, since their arm cannot contend with God, and since his enemies shah be destroyed.

(4.) It is right that the incorrigibly wicked should be cut off. When a man's character is fully developed; when he is fairly tried; when, in all circumstances, he has shown that he will not obey God, neither justice nor mercy hinders the Almighty from cutting him down, and consigning him to death.

(q) "saith unto Pharaoh" Ex 9:16 Verse 18. Therefore hath he mercy, etc. This is a conclusion stated by the apostle as the result of all the argument.

Whom he will he hardeneth. This is not stated in what the Scripture said to Pharaoh, but is a conclusion to which the apostle had arrived, in view of the case of Pharaoh. The word hardeneth means only to harden in the manner specified in the case of Pharaoh. It does not mean to exert a positive influence, but to leave a sinner to his own course, and to place him in circumstances where the character will be more and more developed. Jn 12:40. It implies, however, an act of sovereignty on the part of God in thus leaving him to his chosen Course, and in not putting forth that influence by which he could be saved from death. Why this is, the apostle does not state. We should, however, not dispute a fact everywhere prevalent; and should have sufficient confidence in God to believe that it is in accordance with infinite wisdom and rectitude. Verse 19. Thou wilt say then unto me. The apostle here refers to an objection that might be made to his argument. If the position which he had been endeavouring to establish were true; if God had a purpose in all his dealings with men: if all the revolutions among men happened according to his decree, so that he was not disappointed, or his plan frustrated; and if his own glory was secured in all this, why could he blame men?

Why doth he yet find fault? Why does he blame men, since their conduct is in accordance with his purpose, and since he bestows mercy according to his sovereign will? This objection has been made by sinners in all ages. It is the standing objection against the doctrines of grace. The objection is founded,

(1.) on the difficulty of reconciling the purposes of God with the free agency of man.

(2.) It assumes, what cannot be proved, that a plan or purpose of God must destroy the freedom of man.

(3.) It is said that if the plan of God is accomplished, then that which is best to be done is done, and, of course, man cannot be blamed. These objections are met by the apostle in the following argument.

Who hath resisted his will? That is, who has successfully opposed his will, or frustrated his plan? The word translated resist is commonly used to denote the resistance offered by soldiers or armed men. Thus, Eph 5:13, "Take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand (resist, or successfully oppose) in the evil day." See Lk 21:15, "I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay or resist." See also Acts 6:10, 13:8, "But Elymas-- withstood them," etc. The same Greek word, Rom 13:2, Gal 2:11. This does not mean that no one has offered resistance or opposition to God, but that no one had done it successfully. God had accomplished his purposes in spite of their opposition. This was an established point in the sacred writings, and one of the admitted doctrines of the Jews. To establish it had even been a part of the apostle's design; and the difficulty now was to see how, this being admitted, men could be held chargeable with crime. That it was the doctrine of the Scriptures, see 2Chr 20:6, "In thine hand is there not power and might, so that none is able to withstand thee? Dan 4:35, "He doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?" See also the case of Joseph and his brethren, Gen 1:20, "As for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good."

(r) "who hath resisted his will" 2Chr 20:6, Dan 4:35 Verse 20. Nay but, O man, etc. To this objection the apostle replies in two ways; first, by asserting the sovereignty of God, and affirming that he had a right to do it, (Rom 9:20,21) and, secondly, by showing that he did it according to the principles of justice and mercy, or that it was involved of necessity in his dispensing justice and mercy to mankind, Rom 9:22-24.

Who art thou, etc. Paul here strongly reproves the impiety and wickedness of arraigning God. This impiety appears,

(1.) because man is a creature of God, and it is improper that he should arraign his Maker.

(2.) He is unqualified to understand the subject. "Who art thou ?" What qualifications has a creature of a day,--a being just in the infancy of his existence; of so limited faculties; so perverse, blinded, and interested as man--to sit in judgment on the doings of the Infinite Mind? Who gave him the authority, or invested him with the prerogatives of a judge over his Maker's doings?

(3.) Even if man were qualified to investigate those subjects, what right has he to reply against God, to arraign him, or to follow out a train of argument tending to involve his Creator in shame and disgrace? Nowhere is there to be found a more cutting or humbling reply to the pride of man than this. And on no subject was it more needed. The experience of every age has shown that this has been a prominent topic of objection against the government of God; and that there has been no point in the Christian theology to which the human heart has been so ready to make objections as to the doctrine of the sovereignty of God.

Repliest against God. Margin, "Answerest again; or, disputest with God." The passage conveys the idea of answering again; or of arguing to the dishonour of God. It implies, that when God declares his will, man should be still. God has his own plans of infinite wisdom, and it is not ours to reply against him, or to arraign him of injustice, when we cannot see the reason of his doings.

Shall the thing formed, etc. This sentiment is found in Isa 29:16. See also Isa 45:9. It was peculiarly proper to adduce this to a Jew. The objection is one which is supposed to be made by a Jew, and it was proper to reply to him by a quotation from his own Scriptures. Any being has a right to fashion his work according to his own views of what is best; and as this right is not denied to men, we ought not to blame the infinitely wise God for acting in a similar way. They who have received every blessing they enjoy from him, ought not to blame him for not making them different.

(1) "repliest" or, "answerest again" or, "disputest with God." (s) "shall the thing formed" Isa 29:16. Verse 21. Hath not the potter, etc. This same sovereign right of God the apostle proceeds to urge from another illustration, and another passage from the Old Testament, Isa 64:8, "But now, O Lord, thou art our Father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand." This passage is preceded in Isaiah by one declaring the depravity of man. Isa 64:6, "We are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away." As they were polluted with sin, as they had transgressed the law of God, and had no claim and no merit, God might bestow his favours as he pleased, and mould them as the potter did the clay. He would do no injury to those who were left, and who had no claim to his mercy, if he bestowed favours on others, any more than the potter would do injustice to one part of the mass, if he put it to an ignoble use, and moulded another part into a vessel of honour. This is still the condition of sinful men. God does no injustice to a man if he leaves him to take his own course to ruin, and makes another, equally undeserving, the recipient of his mercy, he violated none of my rights by not conferring on me the talents of Newton or of Bacon; or by not placing me in circumstances like those of Peter and Paul. Where all are undeserving, the utmost that can be demanded is, that he should not treat them with injustice. And this is secured even in the case of the lost. No man will suffer more than he deserves; nor will any man go to perdition feeling that he has a claim to better treatment than he receives. The same sentiment is found in Jer 18:6, "O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in my hand, O house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation," etc. The passage in Isaiah proves that God has the right of a sovereign over guilty individuals; that in Jeremiah, that he has the same right over nations: thus meeting the whole case as it was in the mind of the apostle. These passages, however, assert only the right of God to do it, without affirming anything about the manner in which it is done, In fact, God bestows his favours in a mode very different from that in which a potter moulds his clay. God does not create holiness by a mere act of power, but he produces it in a manner consistent with the moral agency of men; and bestows his favours not to compel men, but to incline them to be willing to receive them. Ps 110:3, "Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power." It should be further remarked, that the argument of the apostle here does not refer to the original creation of men, as if God had then made them one for honour and another for dishonour, he refers to man as fallen and lost. His argument is this: "Man is in ruins; he is fallen; he has no claim on God; all deserve to die. On this mass, where none have any claim, he may bestow life on whom he pleases, without injury to others; he may exercise the right of a sovereign to pardon whom he pleases; or of a potter to mould any part of the useless mass to purposes of utility and beauty."

Potter. One whose occupation it is to make earthen vessels.

Power. This word denotes here not merely physical power, but authority, right. See Mt 7:29, translated "authority;" Mt 21:23, 2Thes 3:9, Mk 2:10, Lk 5:24, "The Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins," etc.

Lump. Mass. It denotes anything that is reduced to a fine consistency, and mixed, and made soft by water; either clay, as in this place, or the mass produced of grain pounded and mixed with water. Rom 11:16, "If the first-fruit be holy, the lump is also holy." 1Cor 5:6, "Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?"

One vessel. A cup, or other utensil, made of clay.

Unto honour. Fitted to an honourable use, or designed for a more useful and refined purpose.

Unto dishonour. To a meaner service, or more common use. This is a common mode of expression among the Hebrews. The lump here denotes the mass of men, sinners, having no claim on God. The potter illustrates God's right over that mass, to dispose of it as seems good in his sight. The doctrine of the passage is, that men have no right to complain if God bestows his blessings where and when he chooses. Verses 22,23. What if God, etc. If God does what the apostle supposes, what then? Is it not right? This is the second point in the answer to the objection in Romm 9:19. The answer has respect to the two classes of men which actually exist on the earth--the righteous and the wicked. And the question is, whether in regard to these two classes God does In Fact do wrong? If he does not, then the doctrine of the apostle is established, and the objection is not valid. It is assumed here, as it must be, that the world is in fact divided into two classes--saints and sinners. The apostle considers the case of sinners in Rom 9:22.

Willing. Being disposed; having an inclination to. It denotes an inclination of mind towards the thing proposed. If the thing itself was right; if it was proper to "show his wrath," then it was proper to be WILLING to do it. If it is right to do a thing, it is right to purpose or intend to do it.

His wrath, (τηνοργην) This word occurs thirty-five times in the New Testament. Its meaning is derived from the idea of earnestly desiring or reaching for an object, and properly denotes, in its general sense, a vehement desire of attaining anything. Hence it comes to denote an earnest desire of revenge, or of inflicting suffering on those who have injured us, Eph 4:31, "Let all bitterness and wrath," etc.; Col 3:8, 1Timm 2:8. Hence it denotes indignation in general, which is not joined with a desire of revenge, Mk 3:5, "He looked round about on them with anger." It also denotes punishment for sin--the anger or displeasure of God against transgression. Rom 1:18; Lk 3:7; Lk 21:23, etc. In this place it is evidently used to denote severe displeasure against sin. As sin is an evil of so great magnitude, it is right for God to be willing to evince his displeasure against it; and just in proportion to the extent of the evil. This displeasure, or wrath, it is proper that God should always be willing to show; nay, it would not be right for him not to show it, for that would be the same thing as to be indifferent to it, or to approve it. In this place, however, it is not affirmed,

(1.) that God has any pleasure in sin, or its punishment; nor

(2.) that he exerted any agency to compel man to sin. It affirms only that God is willing to show his hatred of incorrigible and long-continued wickedness when it actually exists.

To make his power known. This language is the same as that which was used in relation to Pharaoh, ro 9:17; Ex 9:16. But it is not probable that the apostle intended to confine it to the Egyptians only. In the following verse he speaks of "the vessels of mercy prepared unto glory;" which cannot be supposed to be language adapted to the temporal deliverance of the Jews. The case of Pharaoh was one instance, or illustration, of the general principle on which God would deal with men. His government is conducted on great and uniform principles; and the case of Pharaoh was a development of the great laws on which he governs the universe.

Endured. Bore with; was patient, or forbearing, Rev 2:3, "And hast borne, and hast patience," etc. 1Cor 13:7, "Charity (love) beareth all things." Lk 18:7

"Shall not God avenge his own elect, though he bear long with them?"

With much long-suffering. With much patience. He suffered them to live, while they deserved to die. God bears with all sinners with much patience; he spares them amid all their provocations, to give them opportunity of repentance; and though they are fitted for destruction, yet he prolongs their lives, and offers them pardon, and loads them with benefits. This fact is a complete vindication of the government of God from the aspersions of all his enemies.

Vessels of wrath. The word vessel means a cup, etc., made of earth. As the human body is frail, easily broken and destroyed, it comes to signify also the body. 2Cor 4:7: "We have this treasure in earthen vessels." 1Thes 4:4, "That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour" that every one should keep his body from the indulgence of unlawful passions. Comp. Rom 9:3. Hence also it means the man himself. Acts 9:15, "He is a chosen vessel unto me," etc. Comp. Isa 13:3. In this place there is, doubtless, allusion to what he had just said of clay in the hands of the potter. The phrase "vessels of wrath" denotes wicked men against whom it is fit or proper that wrath should be shown; as Judas is called "the son of perdition." Jn 17:12. This does not mean that men by their very creation, or their physical nature, are thus denominated; but men who, from long continuance in iniquity, deserve to experience wrath; as Judas was not called "son of perdition" by any arbitrary appointment, or as an original designation, but because, in consequence of his avarice and treason, this was the name which in fact actually described him, or fitted his case.

Fitted, (κατηρτισμενα). This word properly means to restore; to place in order; to render complete; to supply a defect; to fit to, or adapt to, or prepare for. See Mt 4:21, "Were mending theft nets." Gal 6:1, "Restore such an one," etc. In this place it is a participle, and means those who are fitted for or adapted to destruction--those whose characters are such as to deserve destruction, or as to make destruction proper. See the same use of the word in Heb 11:3, "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed"---beautifully fitted up in proper proportions, one part adapted to another--" by the word of God." Heb 10:5, "A body hast thou prepared for me;" fitted, or adapted to me. Comp. Ps 68:10, 74:16. In this place there is not the semblance of a declaration that God had PREPARED them, or FITTED them for destruction. It is a simple declaration that they were IN FACT fitted for it, without making an affirmation about the manner in which they became so. A reader of the English Bible may, perhaps, sometimes draw the impression that God had fitted them for this. But this is not affirmed; and there is an evident design in not affirming it, and a distinction made between them and the vessels of mercy which ought to be regarded. In relation to the latter it is expressly affirmed that God fitted or prepared them for glory. See Rom 9:23, "Which HE had afore prepared unto glory." The same distinction is remarkably striking in the account of the last judgment in Mt 25:34-41. To the righteous, Christ will say, "Come, ye blessed of my rather, inherit the kingdom prepared FOR YOU," etc. To the wicked, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared FOR THE DEVIL AND HIS ANGELS;" not said to have been originally prepared for them. It is clear, therefore, that God intends to keep the great truth in view, that he prepares his people by direct agency for heaven; but that he exerts no such agency in preparing the wicked for destruction.

For destruction, (ειςαπωλειαν). This word occurs in the New Testament no less than twenty times. Mt 7:13, "Which leadeth to destruction." Jn 17:12, "Son of perdition." Acts 8:20, "Thy money perish with thee;" Greek, be for destruction with thee; Acts 25:16. Php 1:28, "Token of perdition;" Php 3:19, "Whose end is destruction:" 2Thes 2:3, "The son of perdition." 1Timm 6:9, "Which drown men in destruction and perdition." Heb 10:39, "Who draw back unto perdition." See also 2Pet 2:1,3, 3:7,16, etc. In these places it is clear that the reference is to the future punishment of wicked men, and in no instance to national calamities. No such use of the word is to be found in the New Testament; and this is further clear from the contrast with the word "glory" in the next verse. We may remark here, that if men are fitted or prepared for destruction; if future torment is adapted to them, and they to it; if it is fit that they should be subjected to it; then God will do what is fit or right to be done, and, unless they repent, they must perish. Nor would it be right for God to take them to heaven as they are; to a place for which they are not fitted, and which is not adapted to their feelings, their character, or their conduct.

(u) "if God" Prov 16:4 (v) "vessels of wrath" 2Ti 2:20 (1) "fitted to destruction" or, "made up" Verse 23. And that he might make known. That he might manifest or display. The apostle had shown (Rom 9:22) that the dealings of God towards the wicked were not liable to the objection made in Rom 9:19. In this verse he proceeds to show that the objection could not lie against his dealings with the other class of men--the righteous. If his dealings towards neither were liable to the objection, then he has met the whole case, and the Divine government is vindicated. This he proves by showing that for God to show the riches of his glory towards those whom he has prepared for it cannot be regarded as unjust.

The riches of his glory. This is a form of expression common among the Hebrews, meaning the same as his rich or his abundant glory. The same expression occurs in Eph 1:18.

On the vessels of mercy. Men towards whom his mercy was to be displayed, (Rom 9:22) that is, on those towards whom he has purposed to display his mercy.

Mercy. Favour, or pity shown to the miserable. Grace is favour to the undeserving; mercy, favour to those in distress. This distinction is not, however, always strictly observed by the sacred writers.

Which he had afore prepared. We are here brought to a remarkable difference between God's mode of dealing with them and with the wicked. Here it is expressly affirmed that God himself had prepared them for glory. In regard to the wicked, it is simply affirmed that they were fitted for destruction, without affirming anything of the agency by which it was done. That God prepares his people for glory--commences and continues the work of their redemption-- is abundantly taught in the Scriptures, 1Thes 5:9, "God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ." 2Ti 1:9, "Who hath saved us and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." See also Eph 1:4,5,11, Rom 8:28,29,30; Acts 13:48; Jn 1:13. As the renewing of the heart and the sanctifying of the soul is an act of goodness, it is worthy of God, and of course no objection could lie against it. No man could complain of a course of dealings designed to make men better; and as this is the sole design of the electing love of God, his dealings with this class of men are easily vindicated. No Christian can complain that God has chosen him, renewed him, and made him pure and happy. And as this was an important part of the plan of God, it is easily defended from the objection in Rom 9:19.

Unto glory. To happiness; and especially to the happiness of heaven. Heb 2:10, "It became him, in bringing many sons unto glory," etc. Rom 5:2, "We rejoice in hope of the glory of God." 2Cor 4:17, "Our light affliction worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory." 2Thes 2:14, 2Ti 2:10, 1Pet 5:4. This eternal state is called "glory," because it blends together everything that constitutes honour, dignity, purity, love, and happiness. All these significations are in various places attached to this word, and all mingle in the eternal state of the righteous. We may remark here,

(1.) that this word "glory" is not used in the Scriptures to denote any external national privileges; or to describe any external call of the gospel. No such instance is to be found. Of course the apostle here, by vessels of mercy, meant individuals destined to eternal life, and not nations externally called to the gospel. No instance can be found where God speaks of nations called to external privileges, and speaks of them as "prepared unto glory."

(2.) As this word refers to the future state of individuals, it shows what is meant by the word "destruction" in Rom 9:22. That term stands contrasted with glory; and describes, therefore, the future condition of individual wicked men. This is also its uniform meaning in the New Testament. On this vindication of the apostle we may observe, (1.) that all men will be treated as they ought to be treated.

Men will be dealt with according to their characters at the end

of life.

(2.) If men will suffer no injustice, then this is the same

as saying that they will be treated justly; But what is this?

That the wicked shall be treated as they deserve. What they

deserve God has told us in the Scriptures: "These shall go

away into everlasting punishment."

(3.) God has a right to bestow his blessings as he chooses.

Where all are undeserving, where none have any claim,

he may confer his favours on whom he pleases.

(4.) He actually does deal with men in this way. The

apostle takes this for granted. He does not deny it, He

most evidently believes it, and labours to show that

it is right to do so. If he did not believe it, and

meant to teach it, he would have said so. It would have met

the objection at once, and saved all argument. He reasons

as if he did believe it; and this settles the question that

the doctrine is true.

(w) "riches of his glory" Eph 1:18 (x) "which he had afore" 1Thes 5:9 Verse 24. Even us, etc. See Rom 1:16, 2:10, 3:29,30. To prove that the Gentiles might be called as well as the Jews, was a leading design of the epistle.

Us. Christians, selected from both Jews and Gentiles. This proves that he did not refer to nations primarily, but to individuals chosen out of nations. Two things are established here.

(1.) That the grace of God was not confined to the Jewish people, as they supposed, so that it could be conferred on no others.

(2.) That God was not bound to confer grace on all the descendants of Abraham, as he bestowed it on those selected from the mass, according to his own will, and not of necessity on the mass itself. Verse 25. As he saith also. The doctrine which he had established he proceeds now to confirm by quotations from the writings of Jews, that he might remove every objection. The doctrine was,

(1.) that God intended to call his people from the Gentiles as well as the Jews.

(2.) That he was bound by no promise and no principle of obligation to bestow salvation on all the Jews.

(3.) That therefore it was right for him to reject any or all of the Jews, if he chose, and cut them off from their privileges as a people, and from salvation.

In Osee. This is the Greek form of writing the Hebrew word Hosea. It means in the book of Hosea, as in David means in the book of David, or by David, Heb 4:7. The passage is found in Hoss 2:23. This quotation is not made according to the letter, but the sense of the prophet is preserved. The meaning is the same in Hosea and in this place, that God would bring those into a covenant relation to himself, who were before deemed outcasts and strangers. Thus he supports his main position that God would choose his people from among the Gentiles as well as the Jews, or would exercise towards both his right as a sovereign, bestowing or withholding his blessings as he pleases.

(y) "Osee" Hoss 2:23 Verse 26. And it shall come to pass. It shall happen, or take place. This is a continuation of the quotation from the prophet Hosea, (Rom 1:10) designed to confirm the doctrine which he was establishing. Both these quotations have the same design, and are introduced for the same end. In Hosea they did not refer to the calling Of the Gentiles, but to the recalling the rejected Jews. God says, after the Jews had been rejected and scattered for their idolatry; after they had forfeited his favour, and been cast off as if they were not his people, he would recall them, and bestow them again the appellation of sons. The apostle does not quote this as having original reference to the Gentiles, but for the following purposes:--

(1.) If God formerly purposed to recall to himself a people whom he had rejected; if he bestowed favours on his own people after they had forfeited his favour, and ceased to be entitled to the name of "his people " then the same thing was not to be regarded as absurd if he dealt in a similar manner with the Gentiles, also a part of his original great family--the family of man--but long since rejected and deemed strangers.

(2.) The dealings of God towards the Jews in the time of Hosea settled a general principle of government. His treatment of them in this manner was a part of his great plan of governing the world. On the same plan he now admitted the Gentiles to favour. And as this general principle was established; as the history of the Jews themselves was a precedent in the case, it ought not to be objected in the time of Paul that the same principle should be carried out to meet the case also of the Gentiles.

In the place. The place where they may be scattered, or where they may dwell. Or rather, perhaps, in those nations which were not regarded as the people of God, there shall be a people to whom this shall apply.

Where it was said unto them. Where the proper appellation of the people was, that they were not the people of God; where they were idolatrous, sinful, aliens, strangers; so that they had none of the marks of the children of God.

Ye are not my people. People in covenant with God; under his protection, as their Sovereign, and keeping his laws.

There shall they be called. That is, there they shall be. The verb to call, in the Hebrew writings, means often the same as to be. It denotes that this shall be the appellation which properly expresses their character. It is a figure perhaps almost peculiar to the Hebrews; and it gives additional interest to the case. Instead of saying coldly and abstractedly, "they are such," it introduces also the idea that such is the favourable judgment of God in the case. See Mt 5:9, "Peacemakers--shall be called the children of God." Mt 5:9; also Rom 9:19, Mt 21:13, "My house shall be called the house of prayer." Mk 11:17, Lk 1:32, 35, 76, Isa 56:7.

The children of, etc. Greek, Sons. Mt 1:1.

Living God. Called living God in opposition to dead idols. Mt 16:16 also Mt 26:63; Jn 6:69, Acts 14:15; 1Thes 1:9, "Turn from idols to serve the living and true God " Jer 10:10. This is a most honourable and distinguished appellation. No higher favour can be conferred on mortals than to be the sons of the living God, members of his family, entitled to his protection, and secure of his watch and care. This was an object of the highest desire with the saints of old. See Ps 42:2, 84:2, "My soul thirsteth for God, the living God;" "My heart and my flesh cry out for the living God."

(z) "it shall come" Hoss 1:10 Verse 27,28. Esias. The Greek way of writing the word Isaiah.

Crieth. Isa 10:22,23. Exclaims, or speaks aloud or openly. Comp. Jn 1:15. Isaiah brings forth the doctrine fully, and without any concealment or disguise. This doctrine related to the rejection of the Jews; a far more difficult point to establish than was that of the calling of the Gentiles. It was needful, therefore to fortify it by some explicit passage of the Scriptures.

Concerning Israel. Concerning the Jews. It is probable that Isaiah had reference primarily to the Jews of his own time; to that wicked generation that God was about to punish, by sending them captive into other lands. The case was one, however, which settled a general principle of the Jewish government; and therefore it was applicable to the case before the apostle. If the thing for which he was contending--that the Jews might be rejected---existed in the time of Isaiah, and was settled then as a precedent, it might exist also in his time and under the gospel.

As the sand of the sea. This expression is used to denote an indefinite or an innumerable multitude. It often occurs in the sacred writings. In the infancy of society, before the art of numbering was carried to a great extent, men were obliged to express themselves very much in this manner. Gen 22:17, "I will multiply thy seed--as the sand which is upon the sea-shore;" Gen 32:12.- Isaiah doubtless had reference to this promise: "Though all that was promised to Abraham shall be fulfilled, and his seed shall be as numerous as God declared, yet a remnant only," etc. The apostle thus shows that his doctrine does not conflict at all with the utmost expectation of the Jews drawn from the promises of God. See a similar use of the term sand in Jud 7:12, 1Sam 13:5, 2Sam 17:11, etc. In the same manner great numbers were denoted by the stars of heaven, Gen 22:17, 15:5.

A remnant shall be saved. Meaning a remnant only. This implies that great multitudes of them would be cast off, and be not saved. If only a remnant was to be saved, many must be lost; and this was just the point which the apostle was endeavouring to establish. The word remnant means that which is left, particularly what may remain after a battle or a great calamity, 2Kgs 19:31, 10:11, Jud 5:13 Isa 14:22. In this place, however, it means a small part or portion. Out of the great multitude there shall be so few left as to make it proper to say that it was a mere remnant. This implies, of course, that the great mass should be cast away or rejected. And this was the use which the apostle intended to make of it. Comp. the Wisdom of Sirach xliv. 17, "Noah--was left unto the earth as a remnant when the flood came."

Shall be saved. Shall be preserved, or kept from destruction. As Isaiah had reference to the captivity of Babylon, this means that only a remnant should return to their native land. The great mass should be rejected and cast off. This was the case with the ten tribes, and also with many others who chose to remain in the land of their captivity. The use which the apostle makes of it is this: In the history of the Jews, by the testimony of Isaiah, a large part of the Jews of that time were rejected, and cast off from being the peculiar people of God. It is clear, therefore, that God has brought himself under no obligation to save all the descendants of Abraham. This case settles the principle. If God did it then, it was equally consistent for him to do it in the time of Paul, under the gospel. The conclusion, therefore, to which the apostle came, that it was the intention of God to reject and cast off the Jews as a people, was in strict accordance with their own history and the prophecies. It was still true that a remnant was to be saved, while the great mass of the people was rejected. The apostle is not to be understood here as affirming that the passage in Isaiah had reference to the gospel, but only that it settled one great principle of the Divine administration in regard to the Jews, and that their rejection under the gospel was strictly in accordance with that principle.

(a) "Esias also crieth" Isa 10:22,23 Verse 28. He will finish the work. This is taken from the Septuagint translation of Isa 10:23. The Hebrew is, "The Lord God of hosts shall make a consumption, even determined, in the midst of all the land." Or, as it may be rendered, "Destruction is decreed which shall make justice overflow; yea, destruction is verily determined on; the Lord Jehovah will execute it in the midst of all the land." (Stuart.) The Septuagint and the apostle adhere to the sense of the passage, but do not follow the words. The phrase, will finish the work, means, he will bring the thing to an end, or will accomplish it. It is an expression applicable to a firm purpose to accomplish an object. It refers here to his threat of cutting off the people; and means that he will fulfil it.

Cut it short. This word here means to execute it speedily. The destruction shall not be delayed.

In righteousness. So as to manifest his own justice. The work, though apparently severe, yet shall be a just expression of God's abhorrence of the sins of the people.

Because a short work. The word here rendered "short" means, properly, that which is determined on or decreed. This is the sense of the Hebrew; and the phrase here denotes the purpose which was determined on in relation to the Jews.

Upon the earth. Upon the land of Israel. Mt 5:5; Mt 4:8. The design for which the apostle introduces this passage is to show that God of old destroyed many of the Jews for their sin; and that, therefore, the doctrine of the apostle was no new thing, that the Jews might be excluded from the peculiar privileges of the children of God.

(1) "the work" or, "the account" (a) "because a short work" Isa 28:22 Verse 29. And as Esaias said. Isa 1:9.

Before. The apostle had just cited one prediction from the tenth chapter of Isaiah. He now says that Isaiah had affirmed the same thing in a previous part of his prophecy.

Except the Lord of Sabaoth. In Isaiah, the Lord of Hosts. The word Sabaoth is the Hebrew word rendered hosts. It properly denotes armies or military hosts organized for war. Hence it denotes the hosts of heaven, and means

(1.) the angels, who are represented as marshalled or arranged into military orders, Eph 1:21, 3:10, 6:12, Col 1:16, 2:15, Jude 1:6 1Kgs 22:19, "I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him" Ps 103:21, 148:2.

(2.) The stars, Jer 33:22, "As the host of heaven cannot be numbered," etc.; Isa 40:26, De 4:19, etc. God is called the Lord of hosts, as being at the head of all these armies; their King and their Commander. It is a phrase properly expressive of his majesty and power, and is appropriately introduced here, as the act of saving "the seed" was a signal act of power in the midst of great surrounding wickedness.

Had left. Had preserved, or kept from destruction. Here their preservation is ascribed to God, and it is affirmed that if God had not interposed, the whole nation would have been cut off. This fully establishes the doctrine of the apostle, that God might cast off the Jews, and extend the blessings to the Gentiles.

A seed. The Hebrew in Isaiah means one surviving or escaping, corresponding with the word remnant. The word seed commonly means, in the Scriptures, descendants, posterity. In this place it means a part, a small portion; a remnant, like the small portion of the harvest which is reserved for sowing.

We had been as Sodoma. The nation was so wicked, that unless God had preserved a small number who were pious from the general corruption of the people, they would have been swept off by judgment, like Sodom and Gomorrah. We are told that ten righteous men would have saved Sodom, Gen 18:32. Among the Israelites, in a time of great general depravity, a small number of holy men were found who preserved the nation. The design of the apostle here was the same as in the previous verses--to show that it was settled in the Jewish history that God might cast off the people, and reject them from enjoying the peculiar privileges of his friends. It is true that in Isaiah he has reference to the temporal punishment of the Jews. But it settles a great principle, for which Paul was contending, that God might cast off the nation consistently with his promises and his plans.--We may learn here,

(1.) that the existence of religion among a people is owing to the love of God. "Except the Lord had left us," etc.

(2.) It is owing to his mercy that any men are kept from sin, and any nation from destruction.

(3.) We see the value of religion and of pious men in a nation. Ten such would have saved Sodom; and a few such saved Judea. Comp. Mt 5:13,14.

(4.) God has a right to withdraw his mercies from any other people, however exalted their privileges, and leave them to ruin; and we should not be high-minded, but fear, Rom 10:20.

(c) "Except the Lord" Isa 1:9, Lam 3:22 (d) "we had been as" Gen 19:24,25, Isa 13:19 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 Verse 31. But Israel. The Jews. The apostle does not mean to affirm that none of the Jews had obtained mercy, but that as a people, or acting according to the prevalent principles of the nation to work out their own righteousness, they had not obtained it.

Which followed after the law of righteousness. The phrase, "the law of righteousness," means the law of justice, or the just law. That law demands perfect purity; and even its external observance demanded holiness. The Jews supposed that they rendered such obedience to that law as to constitute a meritorious ground of justification. This they had followed after; that is, pursued zealously and unremittingly. The reason why they did not obtain justification in that way is fully stated in chapters 1-3., where it is shown that the law demands perfect compliance with its precepts; and that Jews, as well as Gentiles, had altogether failed in rendering such compliance.

Hath not attained to the law of righteousness. They have not come to yield true obedience to the law, even though imperfect; not such obedience as to give evidence that they have been justified. We may remark here,

(1.) that no conclusion could have been more humbling to a Jew than this. It constituted the whole of the prevalent religion, and was the object of their incessant toils.

(2.) As they made the experiment fully, and failed; as they had the best advantages for it, and did not succeed, but reared only a miserable and delusive system of self-righteousness, (Php 3:4-9); it follows, that all similar experiments must fail, and that none now can be justified by the law.

(3.) Thousands fail in the same attempt. They seek to justify themselves before God. They attempt to weave a righteousness of their own. The moral man does this. The immoral man attempts it as much as the moral man, and is as confident in his own righteousness. The troubled sinner does this; and this it is which keeps him so long from the cross of Christ. All this must be renounced; and man must come as a poor, lost, ruined sinner, and throw himself upon the mere mercy of God in Christ for justification and life.

(g) "which followed after the law" Rom 10:2, 11:7 Verse 32. Wherefore? Why. The apostle proceeds to state the reason why so uniform and remarkable a result happened.

They sought it not by faith, etc. They depended on their own righteousness, and not on the mercy of God to be obtained by faith.

By the works of the law. By complying with all the demands of the law, so that they might merit salvation. Their attempted obedience included their prayers, fastings, sacrifices, etc., as well as compliance with the demands of the moral law. It may be asked here, perhaps, how the Jews could know any better than this? How should they know anything about justification by faith. To this I answer,

(1.) that the doctrine was stated in the Old Testament. See Hab 2:4. Comp. Rom 1:17. Ps 32; Ps 130; Ps 14. Comp. Rom 3, Job 9:2.

(2.) The sacrifices had reference to a future state of things, and were doubtless so understood. See the epistle to the Hebrews.

(3.) The principle of justification, and of living by faith, had been fully brought out in the lives and experience of the saints Of old. See Rom 4, Heb 11.

They stumbled. They fell; or failed; or this was the cause why they did not obtain it.

At that stumbling-stone. To wit, at that which he specifies in the following verse. A stumbling-stone is a stone or impediment in the path, over which men may fall. Here it means that obstacle which prevented their attaining the righteousness of faith; and which was the occasion of their fall, rejection, and ruin. That was the rejection and the crucifixion of their own Messiah; their unwillingness to be saved by him; their contempt of him and his message. For this God withheld from them the blessings of justification, and was about to cast them off as a people. This also the apostle proceeds to prove was foretold by the prophets. Verse 33. As it is written. See Isa 8:14, 28:16. The quotation here is made up of both these passages, and contains the substance of both. Comp. also Ps 118:22, 1Pet 2:6.

Behold I lay in Sion. Mount Zion was the hill or eminence in Jerusalem, over against Mount Moriah, on which the temple was built. On this was the palace of David, and this was the residence of the court, 1Chr 11:5-8. Hence the whole city was often called by that name, Ps 48:12, 69:35, 87:2. Hence also it came to signify the capital, the glory of the people of God, the place of solemnities; and hence also the church itself, Ps 2:6, 51:18, 102:13, 137:3, Isa 1:27, 52:1 Isa 59:20; etc. In this place it means the church. God will place or establish in the midst of that church.

A stumbling-stone and rock of offence. Something over which men shall fall. Mt 5:29. This is, by Paul, referred to the Messiah. He is called rock of stumbling, not because it was the design of sending him that men should fall, but because such would be the result. The application of the term rock to the Messiah is derived from the custom of building, as he is the cornerstone or the immovable foundation on which the church is to be built. It is not on human merits, but by the righteousness of the Saviour, that the church is to be reared. See 1Pet 2:6, "I lay in Sion a chief corner-stone." Ps 118:22, "The stone which the builders rejected is become the head stone of the corner." Eph 2:20, "Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone." This rock, designed as a corner-stone to the church, became, by the wickedness of the Jews, the block over which they fall into ruin, 1Pet 2:8.

Shall not be ashamed. This is taken substantially from the Septuagint translation of Isa 28:16, though with some variation. The Hebrew is, "shall not make haste," as it is in our English version. This is the literal meaning of the Hebrew word; but it means also to be afraid, as one who makes haste often is; to be agitated with fear or fright; and hence it has a signification nearly similar to that of shame. It expresses the substance of the same thing, Viz., failure of obtaining expected success and happiness. The meaning here is, that the man who believes shall not be agitated, or thrown into commotion, by fear of want of success; shall not be disappointed in his hopes; and: of course, he shall never be ashamed that he became a Christian. They who do not believe in Christ shall be agitated, fall, and sink into eternal shame and contempt, Dan 12:2. They who do believe shall be confident; shall not be deceived, but shall obtain the object of their desires. It is clear that Paul regarded the passage in Isaiah as referring to the Messiah. The same also is the case with the other sacred writers who have quoted it, 1Pet 2:5-8. See also Mt 21:42, Lk 20:17,18, 2:34. The ancient Targum of Jonathan translates the passage, Isa 28:16, "Lo, I will place in Zion a king, a king strong, mighty, and terrible;" referring doubtless to the Messiah. Other Jewish writings also show that this interpretation was formerly given by the Jews to the passage in Isaiah.

In View of this argument of the apostle we may remark,

(1.) that God is a Sovereign, and has a right to dispose of men as he pleases.

(2) The doctrine of election was manifest in the case of the Jews as an established principle of the Divine government, and is therefore true,

(3.) It argues great want of proper feeling to be opposed to this doctrine. It is saying, in other words, that we have not confidence in God; or that we do not believe that he is qualified to direct the affairs of his own universe as well as we.

(4.) The doctrine of election is a doctrine which is not arbitrary; but which will yet be seen to be wise, just, and good. It is the source of all the blessings that any mortals enjoy; and, in the case before us, it can be seen to be benevolent as well as just. It is better that God should cast off a part of the small nation of the Jews, and extend these blessings to the Gentiles, than that they should always have been confined to Jews. The world is better for it, and more good has come out of it.

(5.) The fact, that the gospel has been extended to all nations, is proof that it is from heaven. To a Jew there was no motive to attempt to break down all the existing institutions of his nation, and make the blessings of religion common to all nations, unless he knew that the gospel system was true. Yet the apostles were Jews; educated with all the prejudices of the Jewish people.

(6.) The interests of Christians are safe. They shall not be ashamed or disappointed, God will keep them, and bring them to his kingdom.

(7.) Men still are offended at the cross of Christ. They contemn and despise him. He is to them as a root out of dry ground, and they reject him, and fall into ruin. This is the cause why sinners perish; and this only. Thus as the ancient Jews brought ruin on themselves and their country, so do sinners bring condemnation and woe on their souls. And as the ancient despisers and crucifiers of the Lord Jesus perished, so will all those who work iniquity and despise him now.

(h) "As it is written" Ps 118:22, Isa 8:14.

Ephesians 1

Verse 26. Let us not be desirous of vain glory. The word here used κενοδοξοι means, proud or vain of empty advantages, as of birth, property, eloquence, or learning. The reference here is probably to the paltry competitions which arose on account of these supposed advantages. It is possible that this might have been one cause of the difficulties existing in the churches of Galatia, and the apostle is anxious wholly to check and remove it. The Jews prided themselves on their birth; and men are everywhere prone to over-value the supposed advantages of birth and blood. The doctrines of Paul are, that in great and most vital respects men are on a level; that these things contribute nothing to salvation, Gal 3:28 ; and that Christians should esteem them of little importance, and that they should not be suffered to interfere with their fellowship, or to mar their harmony and peace. Provoking one another. The sense is, that they who are desirous of vain glory, do provoke one another. They provoke those whom they regard as inferiors by a haughty carriage and a contemptuous manner towards them. They look upon-them often with contempt; pass them by with disdain; treat them as beneath their notice; and this provokes, on the other hand, hard feeling, and hatred, and a disposition to take revenge. When men regard themselves as equal in their great and vital interests; when they feel that they are fellow-heirs of the grace of life; when they feel that they belong to one great family, and are in their great interests on a level; deriving no advantage from birth and blood; on a level as descendants of the same apostate father; as being themselves sinners; on a level at the foot of the cross, at the communion table, on beds of sickness, in the grave, and at the bar of God; when they feel this, then the consequences here referred to will be avoided. There will be no haughty carriage such as to provoke opposition; and, on the other hand, there will be no envy on account of the superior rank of others.

Envying one another. On account of their superior wealth, rank, talent, learning. The true way to cure envy is to make men feel that in their great and important interests they are on a level. Their great interests are beyond the grave. The distinctions of this life are temporary, and are comparative trifles. Soon all will be on a level in the grave, and at the bar of God, and in heaven. Wealth, and honour, and rank do not avail there. The poorest man will wear as bright a crown as the rich; the man of most humble birth will be admitted as near the throne as he who can boast the longest line of illustrious ancestors. Why should a man who is soon to wear a "crown incorruptible and undefiled, and that fadeth not away," envy him who has a ducal coronet here, or a royal diadem--baubles that are soon to be laid aside for ever? Why should he, though poor here, who is soon to inherit the treasures of heaven, where "moth and rust do not corrupt," envy him who can walk over a few acres as his own, or who has accumulated a glittering pile of dust, soon to be left for ever? Why should he who is soon to wear the robes of salvation, made "white in the blood of the Lamb," envy him who is "clothed in purple and fine linen," or who can adorn himself and his family in the most gorgeous attire which art and skill can make, soon to give place to the winding-sheet, soon to be succeeded by the simple garb which the most humble wears in the grave? If men feel that their great interests are beyond the tomb; that in the important matter of salvation they are on a level; that soon they are to be undistinguished beneath the clods of the valley, how unimportant comparatively would it seem to adorn their bodies, to advance their name and rank, and to improve their estates? The rich and the great would cease to look down with contempt on those of more humble rank; and the poor would cease to envy those above them, for they are soon to be their equals in the grave; their equals, perhaps their superiors, in heaven !

(b) "Let us not" Php 2:3 INTRODUCTION to EPHESIANS

THE SITUATION OF EPHESUS, AND THE CHARACTER OF ITS PEOPLE.

This Epistle purports to have been written to the "saints at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus," though, as we shall see, the fact of its having been directed to the church at Ephesus has been called in question. Assuming now that it was sent to Ephesus, it is of importance to have a general view of the situation of that city, of the character of its people, and of the time and manner in which the gospel was introduced there, in order to a correct understanding of the epistle. Ephesus was a celebrated city of Ionia in Asia Minor, and was about 40 miles south of Smyrna, and near the mouth of the river Cayster. The river, though inferior in beauty to the Meander, which flows south of it, waters a fertile vale of the ancient Ionia. Ionia was the most beautiful and fertile part of Asia Minor; was settled almost wholly by Greek colonies; and embosomed Pergamos, Smyrna, Ephesus, and Miletus. See Travels of Anacharsis, i. 91,208; vi. 192, 97, 98. The climate of Ionia is represented as remarkably mild, and the air as pure and sweet, and this region became early celebrated for everything that constitutes softness and effeminacy in life. Its people were distinguished for amiableness and refinement of manners; and also for luxury, for music and dancing, and for the seductive arts that lead to vicious indulgence. Numerous festivals occupied them at home, or attracted them to neighbouring cities, where the men appeared in magnificent habits, and the women in all the elegance of female ornament, and with all the desire of pleasure.-- Anachar.

Ephesus was not, like Smyrna, distinguished for commercial advantages. The consequence has been that, not having such advantage, it has fallen into total ruin, while Smyrna has retained some degree of its ancient importance It was in a rich region of country, and seems to have risen into importance mainly because it became the favourite resort of foreigners in the worship of Diana, and owed its celebrity to its temple more than to anything else. This city was once, however, the most splendid city in Asia Minor. Stephens, the geographer, gives it the title of Epiphanestate, or "Most Illustrious;" Pliny styles it "The Ornament of Asia." In Roman times it was the metropolis of Asia, and unquestionably rose to a degree of splendour that was surpassed by few, if any, oriental cities.

That for which the city was most celebrated was the temple of Diana. This temple was 425 feet in length, and 220 in breadth. It was encompassed by 127 pillars, each 60 feet in height, which were presented by as many kings. Some of those pillars, it is said, are yet to be seen in the mosque of St. Sophia at Constantinople, having been removed there when the church of St. Sophia was erected. These, however, were the pillars that constituted a part of the temple after it had been burned and was repaired, though it is probable that the same pillars were retained in the second temple which had constituted the glory of the first. All the provinces of Asia Minor contributed to the erection of this splendid temple, and two hundred years were consumed in building it. This temple was set on fire by a man named Herostratus, who, when put to the torture, confessed that his only motive was to immortalize his name. The general assembly of the states of Ionia passed a decree to devote his name to oblivion; but the fact of the decree has only served to perpetuate it. Cicer. De Nat. Deor. 2, 27. Plutarch. Life of Alex. Comp. Anachar. vi. 189. The whole of the edifice was consumed, except the four walls and some of the columns. It was, however, rebuilt, with the same magnificence as before, and was regarded as one of the wonders of the world. It is now in utter ruin. After the temple had been repeatedly pillaged by the barbarians, Justinian removed the columns to adorn the church of St. Sophia at Constantinople. The place where it stood can now be identified certainly, if at all, only by the marshy spot on which it was erected, and by the prodigious arches raised above as a foundation. The vaults formed by them compose a sort of labyrinth, and the water is knee-deep beneath. There is not an apartment entire; but thick walls, shafts of columns, and fragments of every kind, are scattered around in confusion. Ency. Geog. ii. 273, 274.

In the reign of Tiberius, Ephesus was greatly damaged by an earthquake; but it was repaired and embellished by the emperor. In the war between Mithridates and the Romans, Ephesus took part with the former, and, massacred the Romans who dwelt in it. Syll severely punished this cruelty; but Ephesus was afterwards treated with lenity, and enjoyed its own laws, with other privileges. About the end of the eleventh century, it was seized by a pirate named Tangripermes, but he was routed by John Ducas, the Greek admiral, in a bloody battle. Theodorus Lascarus, a Greek, made himself master of it in 1206. The Mohammedans recovered it in 1283. In the year 1401, Tamerlane employed a whole month in plundering the city and the neighbouring country. Shortly after the city was set on fire, and was mostly burned in a combat between the Turkish governor and the Tartars. In 1405 it was taken by Mahomet I., and has continued since that time in the possession of the Turks. Calmet.

There is now a small and mean village named Ayasaluk, near the site of the ancient town, consisting of a few cottages, which is all that now represents this city of ancient splendour. Dr. Chavolla says, "The inhabitants are a few Greek peasants, living in extreme wretchedness, dependence, and insensibility; the representatives of an illustrious people, and inhabiting the wreck of their greatness-some in the substructions of the glorious edifices which they raised--some beneath the vaults of the Stadium, once the crowded scene of their diversions--and some by the abrupt precipice in the sepulchres which received their ashes. Its streets are obscured and overgrown. A herd of goats was driven to it for shelter from the sun at noon, and a noisy flight of crows, from the quarries, seemed to insult its silence. We heard the partridge call in the area of the theatre and the stadium. The glorious pomp of its heathen worship is no longer numbered; and Christianity which was here nursed by apostles, and fostered by general councils, until it increased to fulness of stature, barely lingers on in an existence hardly visible." Travels. p. 131. Oxford, 1775. A very full and interesting description of Ephesus, as it appeared in 1739 may be seen in Pococke's Travels, vol. ii. Part ii. pp. 45--53, ed. Lond. 1745. Several ruins are described by him, but they have mostly now disappeared. The temple of Diana was on the western side of the plain on which the city was built, and the site is now in the midst of a morass which renders access difficult. The ruins of several theatres and other buildings are described by Pococke.

In the year 1821, Mr Fisk, the American Missionary, visited the ruins of Ephesus, of which he has given the following account. "We sent back our horses to Aisaluck, and set out on foot to survey the ruins of Ephesus. The ground was covered with high grass or grain, and a very heavy dew rendered the walking rather unpleasant. On the east side of the hill, we found nothing worthy of notice; no appearance of having been occupied for buildings. On the north side was the circus or stadium. Its length, from east to west, is forty rods or one stadium. The north or lower side was supported by arches, which still remain. The area, where the races used to be performed, is now a field of wheat. At the west end was the gate. The walls adjoining it are still standing, and are of considerable height and strength. North of the stadium, and separated only by a street, is a large square, inclined with fallen walls, and filled with the ruins of various edifices. A street running north and south divides this square in the centre. West of the stadium is an elevation of ground level at the top, with an immense pedestal in the centre of it. What building stood there it is not easy to say. Between this and the stadium was a street passing from the great plain north of Ephesus, into the midst of the city.

"I found on the plains of Ephesus some Greek peasants, men and women, employed in pulling up tares and weeds from the wheat. I ascertained, however, that they all belonged to villages at a distance, and came there to labour. Tournefort says that, when he was at Ephesus, there were thirty or forty Greek families there. Chandler found only ten or twelve individuals. Now no human being lives in Ephesus; and in Aisaluck, which may be considered as Ephesus under another name, though not on precisely the same spot of ground, there are merely a few miserable Turkish huts.

"The plain of Ephesus is now very unhealthy, owing to the fogs and mist which almost continually rest upon it. The land, however, is rich, and the surrounding country is both fertile and healthy. The adjacent hills would furnish many delightful situations for villages, if the difficulties were removed which are thrown in the way by a despotic government, oppressive argas, and wandering banditti." Missionary Herald for 1821, p. 219.

II.---THE INTRODUCTION OF THE GOSPEL AT EPHESUS.

IT is admitted by all that the gospel was introduced into Ephesus by the apostle Paul. He first preached there when on his way from Corinth to Jerusalem, about the year 54. Acts 18:19. On this visit he went into the synagogue, as was his usual custom, and preached to his own countrymen, but he does not appear to have preached publicly to the heathen. He was requested to remain longer with them, but he said he must by all means be in Jerusalem at the approaching feast--probably the passover. Acts 18:21. He promised, however, to visit them again if possible, and sailed from Ephesus to Jerusalem. Two persons had gone with Paul from Corinth--Priscilla and Aquila--whom he appears to have left at Ephesus, or who at any rate soon returned there. Acts 18:18,26. During the absence of Paul, there came to Ephesus a certain Jew, born in Alexandria, named Apollos, an eloquent man, and mighty in the Scriptures, who had received the baptism of John, and who taught the doctrine that John had taught. Acts 18:24,25. What was the precise nature of that doctrine it is difficult now to understand. It seems to have been, in substance, that repentance was necessary, that baptism was to be performed, and that the Messiah was about to appear. This doctrine Apollos had embraced with zeal, was ready to defend it, and was in just the state of mind to welcome the news that the Messiah had come. This zealous and talented man, Priscilla and Aquila instructed more fully in the doctrines of the Christian religion, and communicated to him the views which they had received from Paul. Acts 18:26. Paul having gone to Jerusalem as he purposed, returned again to Asia Minor, and taking Phrygia and Galatia in his way, revisited Ephesus, and remained there about three years. Acts 18:23, 19:1, seq. It was during this time that the church was founded, which afterwards became so prominent, and to which this epistle was written. The principal events in the life of Paul there were,

(1.) his baptizing the twelve persons whom he found there, who were disciples of John. Acts 19:1 and following.

(2.) Paul went into the synagogue there, and engaged in an earnest discussion with the Jews, about three months, respecting the Messiah, Acts 19:8-10.

(3.) When many of the Jews opposed him, he left the synagogue, and obtained a place to preach in, in the school-room of a man by the name of Tyrannus. In this place he continued to preach without molestation for two years, and proclaimed the gospel, so that a large portion of the inhabitants had an opportunity of hearing it.

(4.) The cause of religion was greatly promoted by the miracles which Paul wrought, Acts 19:11-17.

(5.) Paul remained there until his preaching excited great commotion, and he was at last driven away by the tumult which was excited by Demetrius, Acts 19:23-41. At this time the gospel had secured such a hold on the people that there was danger that the temple of Diana would be forsaken, and that all who were dependent on the worship of Diana for a livelihood would be thrown out of employment. It is not probable that Paul visited Ephesus after this, unless it was after his first imprisonment at Rome. See Intro. to 2 Timothy. On his way from Macedonia to Jerusalem he came to Miletus, and sent for the elders of Ephesus, and gave them his deeply affecting parting address, expecting to see them no more, Acts 20:16, seq.

Paul remained longer at Ephesus than he did at any other one place preaching the gospel. He seems to have set himself deliberately to work to establish a church there which would ultimately overthrow idolatry. Several reasons may have led him to depart so far from his usual plan, by labouring so long in one place. One may have been that this was the principle seat of idolatry then in the world. The evident aim of Paul in his ministry was, to reach the centres of influence and power. Hence he mainly sought to preach the gospel in large cities, and thus it was that Antioch, and Ephesus, and Corinth, and Athens, and Philippi, and Rome, shared so largely in his labours. Not ashamed of the gospel anywhere, he yet sought mainly that its power should be felt where wealth, and learning, and genius, and talent were concentrated. The very places, therefore, where the most magnificent temples were erected to the gods, and where the worship of idols was celebrated with the most splendour and pomp, and where that worship was defended most strongly by the civil arm, were those in which the apostles sought first to preach the gospel. Ephesus, therefore, as the most splendid seat of idolatry at that time in the whole Pagan world, particularly attracted the attention of the apostle, and hence it was that he was willing to spend so large a part of his public life in that place. It may have been for this reason that John afterwards made it his permanent abode, and spent so many years there as the minister of the church which had been founded by Paul. See % 3. Another reason why Paul sought Ephesus as a field of labour may have been, that it was at that time not only the principal seat of idolatry, but was a place of great importance in the civil affairs of the Roman empire. It was the residence of the Roman proconsul, and the seat of the courts of justice in Asia Minor, and consequently was a place to which there would be attracted a great amount of learning and talent. Macknight. The apostle, therefore, seems to have been anxious that the full power of the gospel should be tried there, and that Ephesus should become as important as a centre of influence in the Christian world, as it had been in Paganism and in civil affairs.

III.---NOTICES OF THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH AT EPHESUS.

THE church at Ephesus was one of the seven churches of Asia, and the first one mentioned to which John was directed to address an epistle from Patmos, Rev 2:1-7. Little is said of it in the New Testament from the time when Paul left it until the book of Revelation was written. The tradition is, that Timothy was a minister at Ephesus, and was succeeded by the apostle John; but whether John came there while Timothy was living, or not until his removal or death, even tradition does not inform us. In the subscription to the second epistle to Timothy, it is said of Timothy that he was "ordained the first bishop of the church of the Ephesians;" but this is of no authority whatever. All that can be with certainty learned about the residence of Timothy at Ephesus is what the Apostle Paul says of him in his first epistle to Timothy, 1Timm 1:3: "As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine." From this it would appear that the residence of Timothy at Ephesus was a temporary arrangement, designed to secure a result which Paul wished particularly to secure, and to avoid an evil which he had reason to dread would follow from his own absence. That it was a temporary arrangement is apparent from the fact, that Paul soon after desired him to come to Rome, 2Ti 4:9,11. The second epistle of Paul to Timothy was written but a few years after the first. According to Lardner, the first was written in the year 56, and the second in the year 62; according to Hug, the first was written in the year 59, and the second in the year 61; according to the editor of the Polyglott Bible, the first was written a.D. 65, and the second A.D. 66. According to either calculation, the time of the residence of Timothy in Ephesus was brief. There is not the slightest evidence, from the New Testament, that he was a permanent bishop of Ephesus, or indeed that he was a bishop at all, in the modern sense of the term. Those who may be disposed to look further into this matter, and to examine the relation which Timothy sustained to the church of Ephesus, and the claim which is sometimes set up for his having sustained the office of a bishop, may find an examination in the Review of Bishop Onderdonk's Tract on Episcopacy, published in the Quarterly Christian Spectator in March, 1834, and March, 1835, and republished in 1843 under the title of "The Organization and Government of the Apostolic Church," [pp. 91--114. London edition.]

Whatever was the relation which he sustained to the church in Ephesus, it is agreed on all hands that John the apostle spent there a considerable portion of his life. At what time he went to Ephesus, or why he did it, is not now known. The common opinion is, that he remained at or near Jerusalem for some fifteen years after the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus, during which time he had the special charge of Mary the mother of the Saviour; that he then preached the gospel to the Parthians and the Indians, and at he then returned and went to Ephesus, in or near which he spent his latter days, and in which, at a very advanced age, he died. It was from Ephesus that, under the Emperor Domitian, A.D. 95, he was banished to the island of Patmos, from which he returned A.D. 97, on the accession of Nerva to the crown, who recalled all who had been banished. John is supposed at that time to have been about ninety years of age. He is said to have died at Ephesus in the third year of Trajan, A.D. 100, aged about ninety-four years. For a full and interesting biography of the apostle John, the reader may consult the "Lives of the Apostles," by David Francis Bacon, pp. 307--376.

Of the subsequent history of the church at Ephesus little is known, and it would not be necessary to dwell upon it in order to an exposition of the epistle before us. It is sufficient to remark, that the "candlestick is removed out of its place," (Rev 2:5,) and that all the splendour of the temple of Diana, all the pomp of her worship, and all the glory of the Christian church there, have alike faded away.

IV.---THE TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING THE EPISTLE.

It has never been denied that the Apostle Paul was the author of this epistle, though it has been made a question whether it were written to the Ephesians or to the Laodiceans. See % v. Dr. Paley (Horae Paulinae) has shown that there is conclusive internal proof that this epistle was written by Paul. This argument is derived from the style, and is carried out by a comparison of this epistle with the other undoubted writings of the apostle. The historical evidence on this point also is undisputed.

It is generally supposed, and indeed the evidence seems to be clear, that this epistle was written during the imprisonment of the apostle at Rome; but whether it was during his first or his second imprisonment is not certain. Paul was held in custody for some two years in Cesarea (Acts 24:27,) but there is no evidence that during that time he addressed any epistle to the churches which he had planted. That this was written when he was a prisoner is apparent from the epistle itself. "The two years in which Paul was imprisoned at Cesarea," says Wall, as quoted by Lardner, "seem to have been the most inactive part of St. Paul's life. There is no account of any proceedings or disputations, or of any epistles written in this space." This may have arisen, Lardner supposes, from the fact that the Jews made such an opposition that the Roman governor would not allow him to have any intercourse with the people at large, or procure any intelligence from the churches abroad. But when he was at Rome he had more liberty. He was allowed to dwell in his own hired house, (Acts 28:30,) and had permission to address all who came to him, and to communicate freely with his friends abroad. It was during this period that he wrote at least four of his epistles--to the Ephesians, the Philippians, the Colossians, and Philemon. Grotius, as quoted by Lardner, says of these epistles, that though all Paul's epistles are excellent, yet he most admires those written by him when a prisoner at Rome. Of the epistle to the Ephesians, he says, it surpasses all human eloquence--rerum sublimitatem adsequans verbis sublimioribus, quam ulla unquam habuit lingua humana---describing the sublimity of the things by corresponding words more sublime than are found else- where in human language. The evidence that it was written when Paul was a prisoner is found in the epistle itself. Thus, in Eph 3:1, he says, "I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ--οδεσμιοςτουχριστου--for you Gentiles." So he alludes to his afflictions in Eph 3:13: "I desire that ye faint not at my tribulations for you." In Eph 4:1, he calls himself the "prisoner of the Lord," or, in the margin, "in the Lord "--οδεσμιοςενκυριω. And in Eph 6:19,20, there is an allusion which seems to settle the inquiry beyond dispute, and to prove that it was written while he was at Rome. He there says that he was an "ambassador in bonds"---εναλυσει in chains, manacles, or shackles; and yet he desires (Eph 1:19,20) that they would pray for him, that utterance might be given him to open his mouth boldly to make known the mystery of the gospel, that he might speak boldly, as he ought to speak.

Now this is a remarkable circumstance. A man in custody, in bonds or chains, and that too for being an "ambassador," and yet asking the aid of their prayers, that in these circumstances he might have grace to be a bold Preacher of the gospel. If he was in prison this could not be. If he was under a strict prohibition it could not well be. The circumstances of the case tally exactly with the statement in the last chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, that Paul was in custody at Rome, that he was permitted to "dwell by himself with a soldier that kept him," Acts 28:16; that he was permitted to call the Jews together, and to debate with them freely, (Acts 28:17-28;) and that Paul dwelt in his own hired house for two years, and "received all that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God," etc., (Acts 28:30,31.) So exactly do these circumstances correspond, that I have no doubt that was the time when the epistle was written. And so unusual is such a train of circumstances--so unlikely would it be to occur to a man to forge such a coincidence, that it furnishes a striking proof that the epistle was written, as it purports to be, by Paul. An impostor would not have thought of inventing such a coincidence. If it had occurred to him to make any such allusion, the place and time would have been more distinctly mentioned, and not have been left as a mere incidental allusion. The apostle Paul is supposed to have been at Rome as a prisoner twice, (comp. Intro. to 2 Tim.,) and to have suffered martyrdom there about A.D. 65 or 66. If the epistle to the Ephesians was written during his second imprisonment at Rome, as is commonly supposed, then it must have been somewhere between the years 63 and 65. Lardner and Hug suppose that it was written April, 61; Macknight supposes it was in 60 or 61; the editor of the Polyglott Bible places it at 64. The exact time when it was written cannot now be ascertained, and is not material.

V.--TO WHOM WAS THE EPISTLE WRITTEN?

The epistle purports to have been written to the Ephesians --"to the saints which are at Ephesus,"--Eph 1:1. But the opinion that it was written to the Ephesians, has been called in question by many expositors. Dr. Paley (Hor. Paul.) supposes that it was written to the Laodiceans. Wetstein also maintained the same opinion. This opinion was expressly stated also by Marcion, a "heretic" of the second century. Michaelis (Into.) supposes that it was a "circular" epistle," addressed not to any church in particular, but intended for the Ephesians, Laodiceans, and some other churches in Asia Minor. He supposes that the apostle had several copies taken; that he made it intentionally of a very general character, so as to suit all; that he affixed with his own hand the subscription, Eph 6:24, to each copy--"Grace be with all them that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity;" that at the beginning of the epistle the name was inserted of the particular church to which it was to be sent--as "to the church in Ephesus"-- "in Laodicea," etc. When the several works composing the New Testament were collected into a volume, he supposes that it so happened, that the copy of this epistle which was used, was one obtained from ephesus, containing a direction to the saints there. This is also the opinion of Archbishop Usher and Koppe. It does not comport with the design of these Notes, to go into an extended examination of the question; and after all that has been written on it, and the different opinions which have been entertained, it certainly does not become any one to be very confident. It is not a question of great importance, as it involves no point of doctrine or duty; but those who wish to see it discussed at length, can be satisfied by referring to Paley's Horae Paulinae; to Michaelis' Intro., vol iv., chap. xx., and tot he Prolegomena of Koppe. The arguments which are alluded to prove that it was addressed to the church at Laodicea, or at least not to the church at Ephesus, are summarily the following:--

(1.) The testimony of Marcion, a heretic of the second century, who affirms that it was sent to the church in Laodicea, and that instead of the reading (Eph 1:1) "in Ephesus," in the copy which he had it was, "in Laodicea." But the opinion of Marcion is now regarded as of little weight. It is admitted that he was in the habit of altering the Greek text to suit his own views. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The text for Verse 1 is continue is continued in notes for Verse 2. Continuation of Notes for Verse 1. Note 2 Verse at end of this note.

(2.) The principal objection to the opinion that it was written to the church at Ephesus, is found in certain internal marks, and particularly in the want of any allusion to the fact that Paul had ever been there, or to anything that particularly related to the church there. This difficulty comprises several particulars:

(a.) Paul spent nearly three years in Ephesus, and was engaged there in deeply interest transactions and occurrences. He had founded the church, ordained its elders, taught them the doctrines which they held, and had at last been persecuted there and driven away. If the epistle was written to them, it is remarkable that there is in the epistle no allusion to any one of these facts or circumstances. This is the more remarkable, as it was his usual custom to allude to the events which had occurred in the churches which he had founded, (see the epistles to the Corinthians and Philippians,) and as on two other occasions at least he makes direct allusion to these transactions at Ephesus. See Acts 20:18-35, 1Cor 15:32.

(b.) In the other epistles which Paul wrote, it was his custom to salute a large number of persons by name; but in this epistle there is no salutation of any kind. There is a general invocation of "peace to the brethren," (Eph 6:23,) but no mention of an individual by name. There is not even an allusion to the "elders" whom, with so much affection, he had addressed at Miletus, (Acts 20,) and to whom he had given so solemn a charge. This is the more remarkable, as in this place he had spent three years in preaching the gospel, and must have been acquainted with all the leading members in the church. To the church at Rome, which he had never visited when he wrote his epistle to the Romans, he sends a large number of salutations, (Rom 16;) to the church at Ephesus, where he had spent a longer time than in any other place, he sends none.

(c.) The name of Timothy does not occur in the epistle. This is remarkable, because Paul had left him there with a special charge, (1Timm 1:3,) and if he was still there, it is singular that no allusion is made to him, and no salutation sent to him. If he had left Ephesus, and had gone to Rome to meet Paul as he requested, (2Ti 4:9,) it is remarkable that Paul did not join his name with his own in sending the epistle to the church, or at least allude to the fact that he had arrived. This is the more remarkable, because in the epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and 1 and 2 Thessalonians, the name of Timothy is joined with that of Paul at, the commencement of the epistle.

(d.) Paul speaks of the persons to whom this epistle was sent, as if he had not been with them, or at least in a manner which is hardly conceivable on the supposition that he had been the founder of the church. Thus, in Eph 1:15,16, he says, "Wherefore also after I heard of your faith in Christ Jesus," etc. But this circumstance is not conclusive. Paul may have been told of the continuance of their faith, and of their growing love and zeal, and he may have alluded to that in this passage.

(e.) Another circumstance on which some reliance has been placed, is the statement in Eph 3:1,2, "For this cause, I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, if ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given to youward," etc. It is argued (see Michaelis) that this is not language which would have been employed by one who had founded the church, and with whom they were all acquainted. He would not have spoken in a manner implying any doubt whether they had ever heard of him and his labours in the ministry on account of the Gentiles. Such are the considerations relied on to show that the epistle could not have been written to the Ephesians.

On the other hand, there is proof of a very strong character that it was written to them. That proof is the following:--

1. The common reading in Eph 1:1, "To the saints which are in Ephesus." It is true, as we have seen, that this reading has been called in question. Mill says that it is omitted by Basil, (Lib. 2. Adversus Eunomium,) as he says, "on the testimony of the fathers and of ancient copies." Griesbach marks it with the sign om., denoting that it was omitted by some, but that in his judgment it is to be retained. It is found in the Vulgate, the Syriac, the Arabic, and the Ethiopic in Walton's Polyglott. Rosenmuller remarks that "most of the ancient codices, and all the ancient versions, retain the word." To my mind this fact is conclusive. The testimony of Marcion is admitted to be of almost no authority; and as to the testimony of Basil, it is only one against the testimony of all the ancients, and is at best negative in its character. See the passage from Basil, quoted in Hug's Introduction.

2. A slight circumstance may be adverted to as throwing light incidentally on this question. This epistle was sent by Tychicus, Eph 6:21. The epistle to the Colossians was also sent from Rome by the same messenger, Col 4:7. Now there is a strong improbability in the opinion held by Michaelis, Koppe, and others, that this was a circular letter, sent to the churches at large, or that different copies were prepared, and the name Ephesus inserted in one, and Laodicea in another, etc. The improbability is this, that the apostle would at the same time send such a circular letter to several of the churches, and a special letter to the church at Colosse. What claim had that church to special notice? What pre-eminence had it over the church at Ephesus? And why should he send them a letter bearing so strong a resemblance to that addressed to the other churches, when the same letter would have suited the church at Colosse as well as the one which was actually sent to them; for there is a nearer resemblance between these two epistles than any other two portions of the Bible. Besides, in 2Ti 4:12, Paul says that he had sent "Tychicus to Ephesus;" and what is more natural than that, at that time, he sent this epistle by him?

3. There is the utter want of evidence from Mss. or versions, that this epistle was sent to Laodicea, or to any other church, except Ephesus. Not a Ms. has been found having the name Laodicea in Eph 1:1; and not one which omits the words "in Ephesus." If it had been sent to another church, or if it had been a circular letter addressed to no particular church, it is scarcely credible that this could have occurred.

These considerations make it plain to me that this epistle was addressed, as it purports to have been, to the church in Ephesus. I confess myself wholly unable, however, to explain the remarkable circumstances that Paul does not refer to his former residence there; that he alludes to none of his troubles or his triumphs; that he makes no mention of the "elders," and salutes no one by name; and that throughout he addresses them as if they were to him personally unknown. In this respect it is unlike all the other epistles which he ever wrote, and all which we should have expected from a man in such circumstances. May it not be accounted for from this very fact, that an attempt to specify individuals where so many were known, would protract the epistle to an unreasonable length? There is, indeed, one supposition suggested by Dr. Macknight, which may possibly explain to some extent the remarkable circumstances above referred to. It is that a direction may have been given by Paul to Tychicus, by whom he sent the letter, to send a copy of it to the Laodiceans, with an order to them to communicate it to the Colossians. In such a case every thing local would be designedly omitted, and the epistle would be of as general a character as possible. This is, however, mere conjecture, and does not remove the whole of the difficulty.

The rest of the material for this note is continued in note for Eph 1:2 due to space limitations for note.

VI.--THE OBJECT FOR WHICH THE EPISTLE WAS WRITTEN.

VERY various opinions have been formed in regard to the design for which this epistle was written. Macknight supposes that it was with reference to the Eleusinian mysteries, and to various religious rites in the temple of Diana, and that Paul intended particularly to state the "mysteries" of the gospel in contradistinction from them. But there is no clear evidence that the apostle had any such object, and it is not necessary to go into an explanation of those mysteries in order to an understanding of the epistle. The epistle is such as might be addressed to any Christians, though there are allusions to customs which then prevailed, and to opinions then held, which it is desirable to understand in order to a just view of it. That there were Jews and Judaizing Christians in Ephesus, may be learned from the epistle itself. That there were those there who supposed that the Jews were to have a more elevated rank than the Gentiles, may also be learned from the epistle; and one object was to show that all true Christians, whether of Jewish or Heathen origin, were on a level, and were entitled to the same privileges. That there was the prevalence of a false and dangerous philosophy there, may also be learned from the epistle; and that there were those who attempted to cause divisions, and who had violated the unity of the faith, may also be learned from it.

The epistle is divided into two parts--

I. The doctrinal part, ch. i.--iii.; and,

II. The practical part, or the application, ch. iv.--vi.

I. The doctrinal part comprises the following topics.

(1.) Praise to God for the revelation of his eternal counsels of recovering mercy, Eph 1:3-14.

(2.) A prayer of the apostle, expressing his earnest desire that the Ephesians might avail themselves fully of all the advantages of this eternal purpose of mercy, Eph 1:15-23.

(3.) The doctrine of the native character of man, as being dead in sins, illustrated by the past lives of the Ephesians, Eph 2:1-3.

(4.) The doctrine of regeneration by the grace of God, and the advantages of it, Eph 2:4-7.

(5.) The doctrine of salvation by grace alone, without respect to our own works, Eph 2:8,9.

(6.) The privilege of being thus admitted to the fellow ship of the saints, Eph 2:11-22.

(7.) A full statement of the doctrine that God meant to admit the Gentiles to the privileges of his people, and to break down the barriers between the Gentiles and the Jews, Eph 3:1-12.

(8.) The apostle prays earnestly that they might avail themselves fully of this doctrine, and be able to appreciate fully the advantages which it was intended to confer; and with this prayer he closes the doctrinal part of the epistle, Eph 3:13-21.

II. The practical part of the epistle embraces the following topics,

(1.) Exhortation to unity, drawn from the consideration that there was one God, one faith, etc, Eph 4:1-16.

(2.) An exhortation to a holy life in general, from the fact that they differed from other Gentiles, Eph 4:17-24.

(3.) Exhortation to exhibit particular virtues--specifying what was required by their religion, and what they should avoid--particularly to avoid the vices of anger, lying, licentiousness, and intemperance, Eph 4:25-32, 5:1-21.

(4.) The duties of husbands and wives, Eph 5:22-33.

(5.) The duties of parents and children, Eph 6:1-4.

(6.) The duties of masters and servants, Eph 6:5-9.

(7.) An exhortation to fidelity in the Christian warfare, Eph 6:10-20.

(8.) Conclusion, Eph 6:21-24.

The style of this epistle is exceedingly animated. The apostle is cheered by the intelligence which he had received of their deportment in the gospel, and is warmed by the grandeur of his principal theme--the eternal purposes of Divine mercy. Into the discussion of that subject he throws his whole soul; and there is probably no part of Paul's writings where there is more ardour, elevation, and soul evinced, than in this epistle. The great doctrine of predestination he approaches as a most important and vital doctrine; states it freely and fully, and urges it as the basis of the Christian's hope, and the foundation of eternal gratitude and praise. Perhaps nowhere is there a better illustration of the power of that doctrine to elevate the soul and fill it with grand conceptions of the character of God, and to excite grateful emotions, than in this epistle; and the Christian, therefore, may study it as a portion of the sacred writings eminently fitted to excite his gratitude and to fill him with adoring views of God.

THE EPISTLE of PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.

ANALYSIS OF THE CHAPTER,

(1.) The salutation, verse 1, 2.

(2.) The doctrine of predestination, and its bearing and design, verses 3-14.

(a.) It is the foundation of praise to God, and is a source of gratitude, verse 3.

(b.) Christians have been chosen before the foundation of the world, verse 4.

(c.) The object was that they should be holy and blameless, verse 4.

(d.) They were predestinated to be the children of God, verse 5.

(e.) The cause of this was the good pleasure of God, or he did it according to the purpose of his will, verse 6.

(f.) The object of this was his own glory, verse 6.

(3.) The benefits of the plan of predestination to those who are thus chosen, verses 7-14.

(a.) They have redemption and the forgiveness of sins, verses 7, 8.

(b.) They are made acquainted with the mystery of the Divine will, verses 9, 10.

(c.) They have obtained an inheritance in Christ, verse 11.

(d.) The object of this was the praise of the glory of God, verse 12.

(e.) As the result of this, or in the execution of this purpose, they were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, verses 13, 14.

(4.) An earnest prayer that they might have a full understanding of the great and glorious plan of redemption, verses 15-23.

(a.) Paul says that he had been informed of their faith, verse 15.

(b.) He always remembered them in his prayers, verse 16.

(c.) His especial desire was that they might see the glory of the Lord Jesus, whom God had exalted to his own right hand in heaven, verses 17-23.

Verse 1. Paul, an apostle. Rom 1:1.

By the will of God. 1Cor 1:1.

To the saints. A name often given to Christians because they are holy. 1Cor 1:2.

In Ephesus. See the Introduction, 1, 5.

And to the faithful in Christ Jesus. This evidently refers to others than to those who were in Ephesus, and it is clear that Paul expected that this epistle would be read by others. He gives it a general character, as if he supposed that it might be transcribed, and become the property of the church at large. It was not uncommon for him thus to give a general character to the epistles which he addressed to particular churches, and so to write that others than those to whom they were particularly directed, might feel that they were addressed to them. Thus the first epistle to the Corinthians was addressed to "the church of God in Corinth--with all that in every place call upon the name of Christ Jesus our Lord." The second epistle to the Corinthians, in like manner, was addressed to "the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia." Perhaps, in the epistle before us, the apostle referred particularly to the churches of Asia Minor, which he had not visited, but there is no reason for confining the address to them. All who are "faithful in Christ Jesus," may regard the epistle as addressed by the Holy Spirit to them, and may feel that they are as much interested in the doctrines, promises, and duties set forth in this epistle, as were the ancient Christians of Ephesus. The word "faithful" here is not used in the sense of trust-worthy, or in the sense of fidelity, as it is often employed, but in the sense of believing, or having faith in the Lord Jesus. The apostle addresses those who were firm in the faith--another name for true Christians. The epistle contains great doctrines about the Divine purposes and decrees in which they, as Christians, were particularly concerned; important "mysteries," (Eph 1:9,) of importance for them to understand, and which the apostle proceeds to communicate to them as such. The fact that the letter was designed to be published, shows that he was not unwilling that those high doctrines should be made known to the world at large; still they pertained particularly to the church, and they are doctrines which should be particularly addressed to the church. They are rather fitted to comfort the hearts of Christians, than to bring sinners to repentance. These doctrines may be addressed to the church with more prospect of securing a happy effect than to the world. In the church they will excite gratitude, and produce the hope which results from assured promises and eternal purposes; in the minds of sinners they may arouse envy, and hatred, and opposition to God.

(a) "saints" Rom 1:7 (b) "at Ephesus" Acts 19 Acts 20 (c) "faithful in Christ Jesus" Col 1:2

Verse 2. Grace be to you. Rom 1:7.

(d) "be to you" Gall 1:3 Verse 3. Blessed by the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. This commences a sentence which continues to the close of Verse 12. The length of the periods in the writings of Paul, is one cause of the obscurity of his style, and renders an explanation often difficult. The meaning of this phrase is, that God has laid a foundation for gratitude for what he has done. The ground or reason of the praise here referred to, is that which is stated in the following verses. The leading thing on which the apostle dwells is God's eternal purpose--his everlasting counsel in regard to the salvation of man. Paul breaks out into the exclamation that God is worthy of praise for such a plan, and that his eternal purposes, now manifest to men, give exalted views of the character and glory of God. Most persons suppose the contrary. They feel that the plans of God are dark, and stern, and forbidding, and such as to render his character anything but amiable. They speak of him, when he is referred to as a sovereign, as if he were tyrannical and unjust; and they never connect the idea of that which is amiable and lovely with the doctrine of eternal purposes. There is no doctrine that is usually so unpopular; none that is so much reproached; none that is so much abused. There is none that men desire so much to disbelieve or avoid; none that they are so unwilling to have preached; and none that they are so reluctant to find in the Scriptures. Even many Christians turn away from it with dread; or if they tolerate it, they yet feel that there is something about it that is peculiarly dark and forbidding. Not so felt Paul. He felt that it laid the foundation for eternal praise; that it presented glorious views of God; that it was the ground of confidence and hope; and that it was desirable that Christians should dwell upon it, and praise God for it. Let us feel, therefore, as we enter upon the exposition of this chapter, that God is to be praised for ALL his plans, and that it is possible for Christians to have such views of the doctrine of eternal predestination as to give them most elevated conceptions of the glory of the Divine character. And let us also be willing to know the truth. Let us approach word after word, and phrase after phrase, and verse after verse, in this chapter, willing to know all that God teaches, to believe all that he has revealed, and ready to say, "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ far all that he has done."

Who hath blessed us. Who does Paul mean here by "us?" Does he mean all the world? This cannot be, for all the world are not thus blessed with all spiritual blessings. Does he mean nations? For the same reason this cannot be. Does he mean the Gentiles, in contradistinction from the Jews? Why, then, does he use the word us,including himself, who was a Jew? Does he mean to say that they were blessed with external privileges, and that this was the only object of the eternal purposes of God? This cannot be, for he speaks of "spiritual blessings ;" he speaks of the persons referred to as having "redemption," and "the forgiveness of sins;" as having "obtained an inheritance," and as being sealed with the "Holy Spirit of promise." These appertain not to nations, or to external privileges, or the mere offers of the gospel, but to true Christians; to persons who have been redeemed. The persons referred to by the word "us," are those who are mentioned in Eph 1:1 1 as "saints"--αγιοις; "holy" and "faithful"-- πιστοις--believing, or believers. This observation is important, because it shows that the plan or decree of God had reference to individuals, and not merely to nations. Many have supposed (see Whitby, Dr. A. Clarke, Bloomfield, and others) that the apostle here refers to the Gentiles, and that his object is to show that they were now admitted to the same privileges as the ancient Jews, and that the whole doctrine of predestination here referred to, has relation to that fact. But, I would ask, were there no Jews in the church at Ephesus? See Ac 18:20,24 19:1-8. The matter of fact seems to have been, that Paul was uncommonly successful there among his own countrymen, and that his chief difficulty there arose, not from the Jews, but from the influence of the heathen, Acts 19:24. Besides, what evidence is there that the apostle speaks in this chapter peculiarly of the Gentiles, or that he was writing to that portion of the church at Ephesus which was of Gentile origin? And if he was, why did he name himself among them as one on whom this blessing had been bestowed? The fact is, that this is a mere supposition, resorted to without evidence, and in the face of every fair principle of interpretation, to avoid an unpleasant doctrine. Nothing can be clearer than that Paul meant to write to Christians as such; to speak of privileges which they enjoyed as peculiar to themselves; and that he had no particular reference to nations, and did not design merely to refer to external privileges.

With all spiritual blessings. Pardon, peace, redemption, adoption, the earnest of the Spirit, etc., referred to in the following verses-- blessings which individual Christians enjoy, and not external privileges conferred on nations.

In heavenly places in Christ. The word places is here understood, and is not in the original. It may mean heavenly places, or heavenly things. The word places does not express the best sense. The idea seems to be, that God has blessed us in Christ in regard to heavenly subjects or matters. In Eph 1:20, the word "places" seems to be inserted with more propriety. The same phrase occurs again in Eph 2:6, 3:10; and it is remarkable that it should occur in the same elliptical form four times in this one epistle, and, I believe, in no other part of the writings of Paul. Our translators have, in each instance, supplied the word "places," as denoting the rank or station of Christians, of the angels, and of the Saviour, to each of whom it is applied. The phrase probably means, in things pertaining to heaven; fitted to prepare us for heaven; and tending toward heaven. It probably refers here to everything that was heavenly in its nature, or that had relation to heaven, whether gifts or graces. As the apostle is speaking, however, of the mass of Christians on whom these things had been bestowed, I rather suppose that he refers to what are called Christian graces, than to the extraordinary endowments bestowed on the few. The sense is, that in Christ, i.e., through Christ, or by means of him, God had bestowed all spiritual blessings that were fitted to prepare for heaven--such as pardon, adoption, the illumination of the Spirit, etc.

(e) "Blessed be the God" 2Cor 1:3, 1Pet 1:3 (1) "places" or "things" Verse 4. According as. The importance of this verse will render proper a somewhat minute examination of the words and phrases of which it is composed. The general sense of the passage is, that these blessings pertaining to heaven were bestowed upon Christians in accordance with an eternal purpose. They were not conferred by chance or hap-hazard. They were the result of intention and design on the part of God. Their value was greatly enhanced from the fact that God had designed from all eternity to bestow them, and that they come to us as the result of his everlasting plan. It was not a recent plan; it was not an after-thought; it was not by mere chance; it was not by caprice; it was the fruit of an eternal counsel. Those blessings had all the value, and all the assurance of permanency, which must result from that fact. The phrase "according as" καθως--implies that these blessings were in conformity with that eternal plan, and have flowed to us as the expression of that plan. They are limited by that purpose, for it marks and measures all. It was as God had chosen that it should be, and had appointed in his eternal purpose.

He hath chosen us. The word "us" here shows that the apostle had reference to individuals, and not to communities. It includes Paul himself as one of the "chosen," and those whom he addressed--the mingled Gentile and Jewish converts in Ephesus. That it must refer to individuals is clear. Of no community, as such, can it be said, that it was "chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world to be holy." It is not true of the Gentile world as such, nor of any one of the nations making up the Gentile world. The word rendered here "hath chosen" - εξελεξατο--is from a word meaning to lay out together, (Passow,) to choose out, to select. It has the idea of making a choice or selection among different objects or things. It is applied to things, as in Lk 10:42. "Mary hath chosen that good part;"--she has made a choice, or selection of it, or has shown a preference for it. 1Cor 1:27: "God hath chosen the foolish things of the world ;" he has preferred to make use of them among all the conceivable things which might have been employed "to confound the wise." Comp. Acts 1:2,24, 6:5, 15:22,25. It denotes to choose out with the accessary idea of kindness or favour. Mk 13:20. "For the elect's sake whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days." Jn 13:18, "I know whom I have chosen." Acts 13:17. "The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers;" that is, selected them from the nations to accomplish important purposes. This is evidently the sense of the word in the passage before us. It means to make a selection or choice, with the idea of favour or love, and with a view to impart important benefits on those whom he chose. The idea of making some distinction between them and others, is essential to a correct understanding of the passage-- since there can be no choice where no such distinction is made. He who chooses one out of many things makes a difference, or evinces a preference--no matter what the ground or reason of his doing it may be. Whether this refers to communities and nations, or to individuals, still it is true that a distinction is made, or a preference given of one over another. It may be added, that so far as justice is concerned, it makes no difference whether it refers to nations or to individuals. If there is injustice in choosing an individual to favour, there cannot be less in choosing a nation--for a nation is nothing but a collection of individuals. Every objection which has ever been made to the doctrine of election as it relates to individuals, will apply with equal force to the choice of a nation to peculiar privileges. If a distinction is made, it may be made with as much propriety in respect to individuals as to nations.

In him. In Christ. The choice was not without reference to any means of saving them; it was not a mere purpose to bring a certain number to heaven; it was with reference to the mediation of the Redeemer, and his work. It was a purpose that they should be saved by him, and share the benefits of the atonement. The whole choice and purpose of salvation had reference to him, and out of him no one was chosen to life, and no one out of him will be saved.

Before the foundation of the world. This is a very important phrase in determining the time when the choice was made. It was not an after-thought. It was not commenced in time. The purpose was far back in the ages of eternity. But what is the meaning of the phrase "before the foundation of the world?" Dr. Clarke supposes that it means "from the commencement of the religious system of the Jews, which," says he, "the phrase some- times means." Such principles of interpretation are they compelled to resort to who endeavour to show that this refers to a national election to privileges, and who deny that it refers to individuals. On such principles the Bible may be made to signify any- thing and everything. Dr. Chandler, who also supposes that it refers to nations, admits, however, that the word "foundation" means the beginning of anything; and that the phrase here means, "before the world began." There is scarcely any phrase in the New Testament which is more clear in its signification than this. The word rendered "foundation"--καταβολη--means, properly, a laying down, a founding, a foundation--as where the foundation of a building is laid; and the phrase "before the foundation of the world, " clearly means before the world was made, or before the work of creation. See Mt 13:35, 25:34, Lk 11:50, Heb 9:26, Rev 13:8, in all which places the phrase "the foundation of the world" means the beginning of human affairs; the beginning of the world; the beginning of history, etc. Thus, in Jn 17:24, the Lord Jesus says, "thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world," i.e. from eternity, or before the work of creation commenced. Thus Peter says (1Pet 1:20) of the Saviour, "who verily was fore-ordained before the foundation of the world." It was the purpose of God before the worlds were made, to send him to save lost men. Comp. Rev 17:8. Nothing can be clearer than that the phrase before us must refer to a purpose that was formed before the world was made. It is not a temporary arrangement; it has not grown up under the influence of vacillating purposes; it is not a plan newly formed, or changed with each coming generation, or variable like the plans of men. It has all the importance, dignity, and assurances of stability which necessarily result from a purpose that has been eternal in the mind of God. It may be observed here,

(1.) that if the plan was formed "before the foundation of the world," all objections to the doctrine of an eternal plan are removed. If the plan was formed before the world, no matter whether a moment, an hour, a year, or millions of years, the plan is equally fixed, and the event equally necessary. All the objections which will lie against an eternal plan, will lie against a plan formed a day or an hour before the event. The one interferes with our freedom of action as much as the other.

(2.) If the plan was formed "before the foundation of the world," it was eternal. God has no new plan. He forms no new schemes. He is not changing and vacillating. If we can ascertain what is the plan of God at any time, we can ascertain what his eternal plan was with reference to the event. It has always been the same-- for "he is of ONE MIND, and who can turn him?" Job 23:13. In reference to the plans and purposes of the Most High, there is nothing better settled than that WHAT HE ACTUALLY DOES, HE ALWAYS MEANT TO Do--which is the doctrine of eternal decrees---and the whole of it.

That we should be holy. Paul proceeds to state the object for which God had chosen his people. It is not merely that they should enter into heaven. It is not that they may live in sin. It is not that they may flatter themselves that they are safe, and then live as they please. The tendency among men has always been to abuse the doctrine of predestination and election; to lead men to say that if all things are fixed there is no need of effort; that if God has an eternal plan, no matter how men live, they will be saved if he has elected them, and that at all events they cannot change that plan, and they may as well enjoy life by indulgence in sin. The apostle Paul held no such view of the doctrine of predestination. In his apprehension it is a doctrine fitted to excite the gratitude of Christians; and the whole tendency and design of the doctrine, according to him, is to make men holy, and without blame before God in love.

And without blame before him in love. The expression "in love," is probably to be taken in connexion with the following verse, and should be tendered, "In love, having predestinated us unto the adoption of children." It is all to be traced to the love of God.

(1.) It was love for us which prompted to it.

(2.) It is the highest expression of love to be ordained to eternal life --for what higher love could God show us?

(3.) It is love on his part, because we had no claim to it, and had not deserved it. If this be the correct view, then the doctrine of predestination is not inconsistent with the highest moral excellence in the Divine character, and should never be represented as the offspring of partiality and injustice. Then, too, we should give thanks that "God has, in love, predestinated us to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ, according to the good pleasure of his will."

(a) "chosen us in him" 1Pet 1:2 (b) "holy and without blame" Lk 1:75, Col 1:22 Verse 5. Having predestinated us. On the meaning of the word here used, Rom 1:4 Rom 8:29. The word used (προοριζω) means, properly, to set bounds before; and then to predetermine. There is the essential idea of setting bounds or limits, and of doing this beforehand. It is not that God determined to do it when it was actually done, but that he intended to do it beforehand. No language could express this more clearly, and I suppose this interpretation is generally admitted. Even by those who deny the doctrine of particular election, it is not denied that the word here used means to predetermine; and they maintain that the sense is, that God had predetermined to admit the Gentiles to the privileges of his people. Admitting, then, that the meaning is to predestinate in the proper sense, the only question is, who are predestinated? To whom does the expression apply? Is it to nations, or to individuals? I In reply to this, in addition to the remarks already made, I would observe,

(1.) that there is no specification of nations here as such, no mention of the Gentiles in contradistinction from the Jews.

(2.) Those referred to were those included in the word "us," among whom Paul was one--but Paul was not a heathen.

(3.) The same objection will lie against the doctrine of predestinating nations which will lie against predestinating individuals.

(4.) Nations axe made up of individuals, and the predetermination must have had some reference to individuals. What is a nation but a collection of individuals? There is no such abstract being or thing as a nation; and if there was any purpose in regard to a nation, it must have had some reference to the individuals composing it. He that would act on the ocean, must act on the drops of water that make up the ocean; for besides the collection of drops of water there is no ocean. He that would remove a mountain, must act on the particles of matter that compose that mountain; for there is no such thing as an abstract mountain. Perhaps there was never a greater illusion than to suppose that all difficulty is removed in regard to the doctrine of election and predestination, by saying that it refers to nations. What difficulty is lessened? What is gained by it? How does it make God appear more amiable and good? Does it render him less partial to suppose that he has made a difference among nations, than to suppose he has made a difference among individuals? Does it remove any difficulty about the offer of salvation, to suppose that he has granted the knowledge of his truth to some nations, and withheld it from others? The truth is, that all the reasoning which has been founded on this supposition, has been merely throwing dust in the eyes. If there is any well-founded objection to the doctrine of decrees or predestination, it is to the doctrine at all, alike in regard to nations and individuals, and there are just the same difficulties in the one case as in the other. But there is no real difficulty in either. Who could worship or honour a God who had no plan, or purpose, or intention in what he did? Who can believe that the universe was formed and is governed without design? Who can doubt that what God does he always meant to do? When, therefore, he converts and saves a soul, it is clear that he always intended to do it. He has no new plan. It is not an after-thought. It is not the work of chance. If I can find out any thing that God has done, I have the most certain conviction that he always meant to do it--and this is all that is intended by the doctrine of election or predestination. What God does, he always meant to do. What he permits, he always meant to permit. I may add further, that if it is right to do it, it was right to intend to do it. If there is no injustice or partiality in the act itself, there is no injustice or partiality in the intention to perform it. If it is right to save a soul, it was always right to intend to save it. If it is right to condemn a sinner to woe, it was right to intend to do it. Let us, then, look at the thing itself; and if that is not wrong, we should not blame the purpose to do it, however long it has been cherished.

Unto the adoption, etc. Jn 1:12; Rom 8:15.

According to the good pleasure of his will. The word rendered "good pleasure"--(ευδοκια)--means a being well pleased; delight in any thing, favour, good-will, Lk 2:14, Php 1:15. Comp. Lk 12:32. Then it denotes purpose, or will, the idea of benevolence being included. Robinson. Rosenmuller renders the phrase, "from his most benignant decree." The evident object of the apostle is to state why God chose the heirs of salvation. It was done as it seemed good to him in the circumstances of the case. It was not that man had any control over him, or that man was consulted in the determination, or that it was based on the good works of man, real or foreseen. But we are not to suppose that there were no good reasons for what he has thus done. Convicts are frequently pardoned by an executive. He does it according to his own will, or as seems good in his sight. He is to be the judge, and no one has a right to control him in doing it. It may seem to be entirely arbitrary. The executive may not have communicated the reasons why he did it, either to those who are pardoned, or to the other prisoners, or to any one else. But we are not to infer that there was no reason for doing it. If he is a wise magistrate, and worthy of his station, it is to be presumed that there were reasons which, if known, would be satisfactory to all. But those reasons he is under no obligations to make known. Indeed, it might be improper that they should be known. Of that he is the best judge. Meantime, however, we may see what would be the effect in those who were not forgiven. It would excite, very likely, their hatred, and they would charge him with partiality or with tyranny. But they should remember that whoever might be pardoned, and on whatever ground it might be done, they could not complain. They would suffer no more than they deserve. But what if, when the act of pardon was made known to one part, it was offered to the others also on certain plain and easy conditions? Suppose it should appear that while the executive meant, for wise but concealed reasons, to forgive a part, he had also determined to offer forgiveness to all. And suppose that they were in fact disposed in the highest degree to neglect it, and that no inducements or arguments could prevail on them to accept of it. Who then could blame the executive? Now this is about the case in regard to God, and the doctrine of election. All men were guilty and condemned. For wise reasons, which God has not communicated to us, he determined to bring a portion at least of the human race to salvation. This he did not intend to leave to chance and hap-hazard. He saw that all would of themselves reject the offer, and that unless some efficient means were used, the blood of the atonement would be shed in vain. He did not make known to men who they were that he meant to save, nor the reason why they particularly were to be brought to heaven. Meantime he meant to make the offer universal; to make the terms as easy as possible, and thus to take away every ground of complaint. If men will not accept of pardon; if they prefer their sins; if nothing can induce them to come and be saved, why should they complain? If the doors of a prison are open, and the chains of the prisoners are knocked off, and they will not come out, why should they complain that others are in fact willing to come out and be saved? Let it be borne in mind, that the purposes of God correspond exactly to facts as they actually occur, and much of the difficulty is taken away. If in the facts there is no just ground of complaint, there can be none, because it was the intention of God that the facts should be so.

(a) "predestinated us" Rom 8:29,30 (b) "adoption of children" Jn 1:12 (c) "pleasure of his will" Lk 12:32 Verse 6. To the praise of the glory of his grace. This is a Hebraism, and means the same as "to his glorious grace." The object was to excite thanksgiving for his glorious grace manifested in electing love. The real tendency of the doctrine, in minds that are properly affected, is not to excite opposition to God, or to lead to the charge of partiality, tyranny, or severity; it is to excite thankfulness and praise. In accordance with this, Paul introduced the statement (Eph 1:3) by saying that God was to be regarded as "blessed" for forming and executing this plan. The meaning is, that the doctrine of predestination and election lays the foundation of adoring gratitude and praise. This will appear plain by a few considerations.

(1.) It is the only foundation of hope for man. If he were left to himself all the race would reject the offers of mercy, and would perish. History, experience, and the Bible alike demonstrate this.

(2.) All the joys which any of the human race have, are to be traced to the purpose of God to bestow them. Man has no power of originating any of them, and ff God had not intended to confer them, none of them would have been possessed.

(3.) All these favours are conferred on those who had no claim on God. The Christian who is pardoned had no claim on God for pardon; he who is admitted to heaven could urge no claim for such a privilege and honour; he who enjoys comfort and peace in the hour of death, enjoys it only through the glorious grace of God.

(4.) All that is done by election is fitted to excite praise. Election is to life, and pardon, and holiness, and heaven. But why should not a man praise God for these things? God chooses men to be holy, not sinful; to be happy, not miserable; to be pure, not impure; to be saved, not to be lost. For these things he should be praised. He should be praised that he has not left the whole race to wander away and die. Had he chosen but one to eternal life, that one should praise him, and all the holy universe should join in the praise. Should he now see it to be consistent to choose but one of the fallen spirits, and to make him pure, and to readmit him to heaven, that one spirit would have occasion for eternal thanks, and all heaven might join in his praises. How much more is praise due to him, when the number chosen is not one or a few, but when millions which no man can number, shall be found to be chosen to life, Rev 7:9.

(5.) The doctrine of predestination to life has added no pang of sorrow to any one of the human race. It has made millions happy who would not otherwise have been, but not one miserable. It is not a choice to sorrow, it is a choice to joy and peace.

(6.) No one has a right to complain of it. Those who are chosen assuredly should not complain of the grace which has made them what they are, and which is the foundation of all their hopes. And they who are not chosen have no right to complain; for

(a.) they have no claim to life.

(b.) They are, in fact; unwilling to come. They have no desire to be Christians and to be saved. Nothing can induce them to forsake their sins and come to the Saviour. Why, then, should they complain if others are in fact willing to be saved? Why should a man complain for being left to take his own course, and to walk in his own way? Mysterious, therefore, as is the doctrine of predestination, and fearful and inscrutable as it is in some of its aspects, yet, in a just view of it, it is fitted to excite the highest expressions of thanksgiving, and to exalt God in the apprehension of man. He who has been redeemed and saved by the love of God; who has been pardoned and made pure by mercy; on whom the eye of compassion has been tenderly fixed, and for whom the Son of God has died, has abundant cause for thanksgiving and praise.

Wherein he hath made us accepted. Has regarded us as the objects of favour and complacency.

In the beloved. In the Lord Jesus Christ, the well-beloved Son of God. Mt 3:17. He has chosen us in him, and it is through him that these mercies have been conferred on us.

(a) "praise of the glory" 1Pet 2:9 (*) "grace" "of His glorious grace" (b) "accepted in the beloved" 1Pet 2:5 Verse 7. In whom we have redemption. On the meaning of the word here rendered redemption-- (απολυτρωσις) -- Rom 3:24. The word here, as there, denotes that deliverance from sin, and from the evil consequences of sin, which has been procured by the atonement made by the Lord Jesus Christ. This verse is one of the passages which prove conclusively that the apostle here does not refer to nations and to national privileges. Of what nation could it be said, that it had "redemption through the blood of Jesus, even the forgiveness of sins?"

Through his blood. By means of the atonement which he has made. See this phrase fully explained in the Rom 3:25.

The forgiveness of sins. We obtain through his blood, or through the atonement he has made, the forgiveness of sins. We are not to suppose that this is all the benefit which we receive from his death, or that this is all that constitutes redemption. It is the main, and perhaps the most important thing. But we also obtain the hope of heaven, the influences of the Holy Spirit, grace to guide us and to support us in trial, peace in death, and perhaps many more benefits. Still forgiveness is so prominent and important, and the apostle has mentioned that as if it were all.

According to the riches of his grace. According to his rich grace. See a similar phrase explained Rom 2:4. The word riches, in the form in which it is used here, occurs also in several other places in this epistle, Eph 1:18, 2:7, 3:8,16. It is what Paley (Horae Paul) calls "a cant phrase," and occurs often in the writings of Paul. See Rom 2:4, 9:23, 11:12,33, Php 4:19, Col 1:27, 2:2. It is not found in any of the other writings of the New Testament, except once, in a sense somewhat similar, in James, (Jas 2:5,) "Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith"? and Dr. Paley from this fact has constructed an argument to prove that this epistle was written by Paul. It is peculiar to him, and marks his style in a manner which cannot be mistaken. An impostor or a forger of the epistle would not have thought of introducing it, and yet it is just such a phrase as would naturally be used by Paul.

(c) "we have redemption" Heb 9:12, 1Pet 1:18,19. Verse 8. Wherein he hath abounded. Which he has liberally manifested to us. This grace has not been stinted and confined, but has been liberal and abundant.

In all wisdom. That is, he has evinced great wisdom in the plan of salvation; wisdom in so saving men as to secure the honour of his own law, and in devising a scheme that was eminently adapted to save men. 1Cor 1:24.

And prudence. The word here used (φρονησις) means understanding, thinking, prudence. The meaning here is, that so to speak, God had evinced great intelligence in the plan of salvation. There was ample proof of mind and of thought, it was adapted to the end in view. It was far-seeing; skilfully arranged; and carefully formed. The sense of the whole is, that there was a wise design running through the whole plan, and abounding in it in an eminent degree. Verse 9. Having made known to us the mystery of his will. The word mystery (μυστηριον) means, literally, something into which one must be initiated before it is fully known (from μυεω, to initiate, to instruct;) and then anything which is concealed or hidden. We commonly use the word to denote that which is above our comprehension, or unintelligible. But this is never the meaning of the word in the New Testament. It means there some doctrine or fact which has been concealed, or which has not before been fully revealed, or which has been set forth only by figures and symbols. When the doctrine is made known, it may be as clear and plain as any other. Such was the doctrine that God meant to call the Gentiles, which was long concealed, at least in part, and which was not fully made known until the Saviour came, and which had been till that time a mystery-- concealed truth-- though, when it was revealed, there was nothing incomprehensible in it. Thus in Col 1:26, "The mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints." So it was in regard to the doctrine of election. It was a mystery until it was made known by the actual conversion of those whom God had chosen. So in regard to the incarnation of the Redeemer; the atonement; the whole plan of salvation. Over all these great points there was a veil thrown and men did not understand them until God revealed them. When they were revealed, the mystery was removed, and men were able to see clearly the manifestation of the will of God.

Which he hath purposed in himself. Without foreign aid or counsel. His purposes originated in his own mind, and were concealed until he chose to make them known. See 2Ti 1:9.

(+) "mystery" "secret" (d) "hath purposed" 2Ti 1:9 Verse 10. That in the dispensation. The word here rendered "dispensation," οικονομιαν, means, properly, the management of household affairs. Then it means stewardship or administration; a dispensation or arrangement of things; a scheme or plan. The meaning here is, that this plan was formed in order (εις) or unto this end, that in the full arrangement of times, or in the arrangements completing the filling up of the times, God might gather together in one all things. Tindal renders it, "to have it declared when the time was full come," etc.

The fulness of times. When the times were fully completed; when all the periods should have passed by which he had prescribed, or judged necessary to the completion of the object. The period referred to here is that when all things shall be gathered together in the Redeemer at the winding up of human affairs, or the consummation of all things. The arrangement was made with reference to that, and embraced all things which conduced to that. The plan stretched from before "the foundation of the world" to the period when all times should be completed; and of course all the events occurring in that intermediate period were embraced in the plan.

He might gather together in one. The word here used--ανακεφαλαιοω means, literally, to sum up, to recapitulate, as an orator does at the close of his discourse. It is from κεφαλη the head; or κεφαλαιον, the sum, the chief thing, the main point. In the New Testament the word means to collect under one head, or to comprehend several things under one. Romm 13:9: "It is briefly comprehended, i.e. summed up under this one precept," sc., love. In the passage before us, it means that God would sum up, or comprehend all things in heaven and earth through the Christian dispensation; he would make one empire under one head, with common feelings, and under the same laws. The reference is to the unity which will hereafter exist in the kingdom of God, when all his friends on earth and in heaven shall be united, and all shall have a common head. Now there is alienation. The earth has been separated from other worlds by rebellion. It has gone off into apostasy and sin. It refuses to acknowledge the Great Head to which other worlds are subject, and the object is to restore it to its proper place, so that there shall be one great and united kingdom.

All things. ταπαντα. It is remarkable that Paul has here used a word which is in the neuter gender. It is not all persons, all angels, or all men, or all the elect, but all things. Bloomfield and others suppose that persons are meant, and that the phrase is used for τουςπαντες. But it seems to me that Paul did not use this word without design. All things are placed under Christ, (Eph 1:22, Mt 28:18,) and the design of God is to restore harmony in the universe. Sin has produced disorder not only in mind, but in matter. The world is disarranged. The effects of transgression are seen everywhere; and the object of the plan of redemption is to put things on their pristine footing, and restore them as they were at first. Everything is therefore put under the Lord Jesus, and all things are to be brought under his control, so as to constitute one vast harmonious empire. The amount of the declaration here is, that there is hereafter to be one kingdom, in which there shall be no jar or alienation; that the now separated kingdoms of heaven and earth shah be united under one head, and that henceforward all shall be harmony and love. The things which are to be united in Christ, are those which are "in heaven and which are on earth." Nothing is said of hell. Of course this passage cannot teach the doctrine of universal salvation, since there is one world which is not to have a part in this ultimate union.

In Christ. By means of Christ, or under him, as the great Head and King. He is to be the great Agent in effecting this, and he is to preside over this united kingdom. In accordance with this view the heavenly inhabitants, the angels as well as the redeemed, are uniformly represented as uniting in the same worship, and as acknowledging the Redeemer as their common head and king, Rev 5:9,10,11,12.

Both which are in heaven. Marg. as in Gr., in the heavens. Many different opinions have been formed of the meaning of this expression. Some suppose it to mean the saints in heaven, who died before the coming of the Saviour; and some that it refers to the Jews, designated as the heavenly people, in contradistinction from the Gentiles, as having nothing divine and heavenly in them, and as being of the earth. The more simple and obvious interpretation is however, without doubt, the correct one, and this is to suppose that it refers to the holy inhabitants of other worlds. The object of the plan of salvation is to produce a harmony between them and the redeemed on earth, or to produce, out of all, one great and united kingdom. In doing this, it is not necessary to suppose that any change is to be produced in the inhabitants of heaven. All the change is to occur among those on earth, and the object is to make, out of all, one harmonious and glorious empire.

And which are on earth. The redeemed on earth. The object is to bring them into harmony with the inhabitants of heaven. This is the great object proposed by the plan of salvation. It is to found one glorious and eternal kingdom, that shall comprehend all holy beings on earth and all in heaven. There is now discord and disunion. Man is separated from God, and from all holy beings. Between him and every holy being there is by nature discord and alienation. Unrenewed man has no sympathy with the feelings and work of the angels; no love for their employment; no desire to be associated with them. Nothing can be more unlike than the customs, feelings, laws, and habits which prevail on earth, from those which prevail in heaven. But the object of the plan of salvation is to restore harmony to those alienated communities, and produce eternal concord and love. Learn hence,

(1.) The greatness and glory of the plan of salvation. It is no trifling undertaking to reconcile worlds, and of such discordant materials to found one great, and glorious, and eternal empire.

(2.) The reason of the interest which angels feel in the plan of redemption, 1Pet 1:12. They are deeply concerned in the redemption of those who, with them, are to constitute that great kingdom which is to be eternal. Without envy at the happiness of others; without any feeling that the accession of others will diminish their felicity or glory, they wait to hail the coming of others, and rejoice to receive even one who comes to be united to their number.

(3.) This plan was worthy of the efforts of the Son of God. To restore harmony in heaven and earth; to prevent the evils of alienation and discord; to rear one immense and glorious kingdom, was an object worthy the incarnation of the Son of God.

(4.) The glory of the Redeemer. He is to be exalted as the Head of this united and ever-glorious kingdom, and all the redeemed on earth and the angelic hosts shall acknowledge him as their common Sovereign and Head.

(5.) This is the greatest and most important enterprize on earth. It should engage every heart, and enlist the powers of every soul. It should be the earnest desire of all to swell the numbers of those who shall constitute this united and ever-glorious kingdom, and to bring as many as possible of the human race into union with the holy inhabitants of the other world.

(1) "in heaven" "the heavens" Verse 11. In whom also we have obtained an inheritance. We who are Christians. Most commentators suppose that by the word "we" the Jews particularly are intended, and that it stands in contradistinction from "ye," as referring to the Gentiles, in Eph 1:13. This construction, they suppose, is demanded by the nature of the passage. The meaning may then be, that the Jews who were believers had first obtained a part in the plan of redemption, as the offer was first made to them, and then that the same favour was conferred also on the Gentiles. Or it may refer to those who had been first converted, without particular reference to the fact that they were Jews; and the reference may be to the apostle and his fellow-labourers. This seems to me to be the correct interpretation. "We the ministers of religion first believed, and have obtained all inheritance in the hopes of Christians, that we should be to the praise of God's glory; and you also, after hearing the word of truth, believed," Eph 1:13. The word which is rendered "obtained our inheritance" κληροω--means, literally, to acquire by lot, and then to obtain, to receive. Here it means that they had received the favour of being to the praise of his glory, for having first trusted in the Lord Jesus.

Being predestinated. Eph 1:5.

According to the purpose. On the meaning of the word purpose, see Notes on Rom 8:28.

Of him who worketh all things. Of God, the universal Agent. The affirmation here is not merely that God accomplishes the designs of salvation according to the counsel of his own will, but that he does everything. His agency is not confined to one thing, or to one class of objects. Every object and event is under his control, and is in accordance with his eternal plan. The word rendered worketh ενεργεω---means, to work, to be active, to produce, Eph 1:20; Gal 2:8, Php 2:13. A universal agency is ascribed to him. "The same God which worketh all in all," 1Cor 12:6. He has an agency in causing the emotions of our hearts. "God, who worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure," Php 2:13. He has an agency in distributing to men their various allotments and endowments. "All these worketh that one and the self-same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will," 1Cor 12:11. The agency of God is seen everywhere. Every leaf, flower, rose-bud, spire of grass; every sunbeam, and every flash of lightning; every cataract and every torrent, all declare his agency; and there is not an object that we see that does not bespeak the control of an all-present God. It would be impossible to affirm more explicitly, that God's agency is universal, than Paul does in the passage before us. He does not attempt to prove it. It is one of those points on which he does not deem it necessary to pause and reason, but which may be regarded as a conceded point in the discussion of other topics, and which may be employed without hesitation in their illustration. Paul does not state the mode in which this is done. He affirms merely the fact. He does not say that he compels men, or that he overbears them by mere physical force. His agency he affirms to be universal; but it is undoubtedly in accordance with the nature of the object, and with the laws which he has impressed on them. His agency in the work of creation was absolute and entire; for there was nothing to act on, and no established laws to be observed. Over the mineral kingdom his control must also be entire, yet in accordance with the laws which he has impressed on matter. The crystal and the snow are formed by his agency; but it is in accordance with the laws which he has been pleased to appoint. So in the vegetable world his agency is everywhere seen; but the lily and rose blossom in accordance with uniform laws, and not in an arbitrary manner. So in the animal kingdom. God gives sensibility to the nerve, and excitability and power to the muscle, He causes the lungs to heave, and the arteries and veins to bear the blood along the channels of life; but it is not in an arbitrary manner. It is in accordance with the laws which he has ordained, and [which] he never disregards in his agency over these kingdoms. So in his government of mind. He "works" everywhere. But he does it in accordance with the laws of mind. His agency is not exactly of the same kind on the rose-bud that it is on the diamond; nor on the nerve that it is on the rose-bud; nor on the heart and will that it is on the nerve. In all these things he consults the laws which he has impressed on them; and as he chooses that the nerve should be affected in accordance with its laws and properties, so it is with mind. God does not violate its laws. Mind is free. It is influenced by truth and motives. It has a sense of right and wrong. And there is no more reason to suppose that God disregards these laws of mind in controlling the intellect and the heart, than there is that he disregards the laws of crystallization in the formation of the ice, or of gravitation in the movements of the heavenly bodies. The general doctrine is, that God works in all things, and controls all; but that his agency everywhere is in accordance with the laws and nature of that part of his kingdom where it is exerted. By this simple principle we may secure the two great points which it is desirable to secure on this subject--

(1.) the doctrine of the universal agency of God; and

(2.) the doctrine of the freedom and responsibility of man.

After the counsel of his own will. Not by consulting his creatures, or conforming to their views, but by his own views of what is proper and right. We are not to suppose that this is by mere will, as if it were arbitrary, or that he determines anything without good reason. The meaning is, that his purpose is determined by what he views to be right, and without consulting his creatures or conforming to their views. His dealings often seem to us to be arbitrary. We are incapable of perceiving the reasons of what he does. He makes those his friends who we should have supposed would have been the last to have become Christians. He leaves those who seem to us to be on the borders of the kingdom, and they remain unmoved and uneffected. But we are not thence to suppose that he is arbitrary. In every instance, we are to believe that there is a good reason for what he does, and one which we may be permitted yet to see, and in which we shall wholly acquiesce. The phrase "counsel of his own will" is remarkable. It is designed to express in the strongest manner the fact that it is not by human counsel or advice. The word "counsel"--βουλη--means, a council or senate; then a determination, purpose, or decree. See Rob. Lex. Here it means that his determination was formed by his own will, and not by human reasoning. Still, his will in the case may not have been arbitrary. When it is said of man that he forms his own purposes, and acts according to his own will, we are not to infer that he acts without reason, he may have the highest and best reasons for what he does, but he does not choose to make them known to others, or to consult others. So it may be of God, and so we should presume it to be. It may be added, that we ought to have such confidence in him as to believe that he will do all things well. The best possible evidence that anything is done in perfect wisdom and goodness, is the fact that God does it. When we have ascertained that, we should be satisfied that all is right.

(a) "being predestinated" Acts 20:22 Verse 13. In whom ye also trusted. This stands in contrast with those who had first embraced the gospel.

Heard the word of truth. The gospel; called the word or message of truth, the word of God, etc. See Rom 10:17. The phrase, "the word of truth," means "the true word or message." It was a message unmixed with Jewish traditions or Gentile philosophy.

The gospel of your salvation. The gospel bringing salvation to you.

In whom also. In the Lord Jesus. A little different translation of this verse will convey more clearly its meaning. "In whom also ye, having heard the word of truth, (the gospel of your salvation,) in whom having also believed, ye were sealed," etc. The sealing was the result of believing, and that was the result of hearing the gospel. Comp. Rom 10:14,15.

Ye were sealed. On the meaning of the word seal, Jn 3:33. Jn 6:27

With that holy Spirit of promise. With the Holy Spirit that was promised. See Jn 16:7-11,13; 15:26, 14:16,17. It is not improbable, I think, that the apostle here refers particularly to the occurrence of which we have a record in Acts 19:1-6. Paul, it is there said, having passed through the upper provinces of Asia Minor, came to Ephesus. He found certain persons who were the disciples of John, and he asked them if they had received the Holy Ghost since they "believed," Eph 1:2. They replied that they had not heard whether there was any Holy Ghost, and that they had been baptized unto John's baptism. Paul taught them the true nature of the baptism of John; explained to them the Christian system; and they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, and "the Holy Ghost came upon them, and they spake with tongues, and prophesied." They were thus sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, "after they had believed," (Eph 1:13;) they had the full evidence of the favour of God in the descent of the promised Holy Spirit, and in his miraculous influences. If this be the true interpretation, it constitutes a striking coincidence between the epistle and the Acts, of such a nature as constitute the arguments in Paley's Horae Paulinae, (though he has not referred to this,) which shows that the epistle was not forged, The circumstance is such that it would not have been alluded to in this manner by one who should forge the epistle; and the mention of it in the epistle is so slight, that no one, from the account there, would think of forging the account in the Acts. The coincidence is just such as would occur on the supposition that the transaction actually occurred, and that both the Acts and the epistle are genuine. At the same time, there is a sealing of the Holy Spirit which is common to all Christians. 2Cor 1:22.

(a) "heard the word of truth" Rom 10:17 (b) "sealed with that Holy Spirit" 2Cor 1:22 (*) "promise" "The promised Holy Spirit" Verse 14. Which is the earnest of our inheritance. On the meaning of the, 2Cor 1:22.

Until the redemption. Rom 8:23. The meaning here is, we have the Holy Spirit as the pledge that that shall be ours, and the Holy Spirit will be imparted to us until we enter on that inheritance.

Of the purchased possession. Heaven, purchased for us by the death of the Redeemer. The word here used--περιποιησις--occurs in the following places in the New Testament: 1Thes 5:9, rendered "to obtain salvation;" 2Thes 2:14 to the obtaining of the glory of the Lord;" Heb 10:39, "to the saving of the soul;" 1Pet 2:9, "a peculiar people;" literally, a people of acquirement to himself; and in the passage before us. It properly means, an acquisition, an obtaining, a laying up. Here it means, the complete deliverance from sin, and the eternal salvation acquired for us by Christ. The influence of the Holy Spirit, renewing and sanctifying us, comforting us in trials, and sustaining us in afflictions, is the pledge that the redemption is yet to be wholly ours.

Unto the praise of his glory. See Eph 1:6

(c) "of our inheritance" 2Cor 5:5 (a) "of the purchased" Rom 8:23 (b) "possession" Acts 20:28 (c) "of his glory" Eph 1:6,12 Verse 15. Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus. This is one of the passages usually relied on by those who suppose that this epistle was not written to the Ephesians. The argument is, that he writes to them as if they were strangers to him, and that it is not language such as would be used in addressing a people among whom he had spent three years. See the Intro. 5. But this inference is not conclusive. Paul had been some years absent from Ephesus when this epistle was written. In the difficult communication in those times between distant places, it is not to be supposed that he would hear often from them. Perhaps he had heard nothing after the time when he bade farewell to the elders of Ephesus at Miletus, (Acts 20,) until the time here referred to. It would be, therefore, a matter of great interest with him to hear from them; and when, in some way, intelligence was brought to him at Rome of a very gratifying character about their growth in piety, he says that his anxiety was relieved, and that he did not cease to give thanks for what he had heard, and to commend them to God in prayer. Verse 16. Cease not to give thanks for you. In the prosperity of the church at Ephesus he could not but feel the deepest interest, and their welfare he never forgot.

Making mention of you in my prayers. Paul was far distant from them, and expected to see them no more. But he had faith in prayer, and he sought that they might advance in knowledge and in grace. What was the particular subject of his prayers he mentions in the following verses. Verse 17. That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ. The God who has sent the Lord Jesus into the world, and appointed him as the Mediator between himself and man. The particular reason why Paul here speaks of him as "the God of the Lord Jesus" is, that he prays that they might be further acquainted with the Redeemer, and be enlightened in regard to the great work which he came to do.

The Father of glory. The glorious Father, that is, the Father who is worthy to be praised and honoured.

May give unto you the spirit of wisdom. May make you wise to understand the great doctrines of the religion of the Redeemer.

And revelation. That is, revealing to you more and more of the character of the Redeemer, and of the nature and results of his work. It is probable here that by the word "Spirit" the apostle refers to the Holy Spirit as the Author of all wisdom, and the Revealer of all truth. His prayer is, that God would grant to them the Holy Spirit to make them wise, and to reveal his will to them.

In the knowledge of him. Marg., for the acknowledgment. That is, in order that you may more fully acknowledge him, or know him more intimately and thoroughly. They had already made high attainments, (Eph 1:15,) but Paul felt that they might make still higher; and the idea here is, that however far Christians may have advanced in knowledge and in love, there is an unfathomed depth of knowledge which they may still explore, and which they should be exhorted still to attempt to fathom. How far was Paul from supposing that the Ephesians had attained to perfection!

(d) "God of our Lord Jesus Christ" Jn 20:17 (e) "wisdom and revelation" Col 1:9 (1) "in the knowledge" "for the acknowledgement" Verse 18. The eyes of your understanding being enlightened. The construction here in the Greek is, probably, "that he may give you (δωη, Eph 1:17) the Spirit of wisdom, etc.--eyes of the understanding enlightened," etc. Or the phrase, "the eyes of your understanding being enlightened," may be in the accusative absolute, which Koppe and Bloomfield prefer. The phrase, "the eyes of the understanding," is a figure that is common in all languages. Thus Philo says, "What the eye is to the body, that is the mind to the soul." Comp. Mt 6:22. The eye is the instrument by which we see; and, in like manner, the understanding is that by which we perceive truth. The idea here is, that Paul not only wished their hearts to be right, but he wished their understanding to be right also. Religion has much to do in enlightening the mind. Indeed, its effect there is not less striking and decisive than it is on the heart. The understanding has been blinded by sin. The views which men entertain of themselves and of God are narrow and wrong. The understanding is enfeebled and perverted by the practice of sin. It is limited in its operations by the necessity of the case, and by the impossibility of fully comprehending the great truths which pertain to the Divine administration. One of the first effects of true religion is on the understanding. It enlarges its views of truth; gives it more exalted conceptions of God; corrects its errors; raises it up towards the great Fountain of love. And nowhere is the effect of the true religion more apparent than in shedding light on the intellect of the world, and restoring the weak and perverted mind to a just view of the proportion of things, and to the true knowledge of God.

That ye may know what is the hope of his calling. What is the full import of that hope to which he has called and invited you by his Spirit and his promises. The meaning here is, that it would be an inestimable privilege to be made fully acquainted with the benefits of the Christian hope, and to be permitted to understand fully what Christians have a right to expect in the world of glory. This is the first thing which the apostle desires they should fully understand.

And what the riches of the glory of his inheritance. This is the second thing which Paul wishes them to understand. There is a force in this language which can be found, perhaps, nowhere else than in the writings of Paul. His mind is full, and language is burdened and borne down under the weight of his thoughts. 2Cor 4:17. On the word "riches" here used, Eph 1:7. The phrase "riches of glory" means glorious wealth; or, as we would say, "how rich and glorious!" The meaning is, that there is an abundance --an infinitude of wealth. It is not such a possession as man may be heir to in this world, which is always limited from the necessity of the case, and which cannot be enjoyed long; it is infinite and inexhaustible. Rom 2:4. The "inheritance" here referred to is eternal life. Rom 8:17.

In the saints. Among the saints. 1Cor 1:2.

(f) "of your understanding" Isa 42:7 (g) "of his calling" Eph 4:4 (h) "riches of the glory" Eph 3:16 (*) "glory" "The glorious riches" Verse 19. And what is the exceeding greatness of his power. On the language here used, 2Cor 4:17. There is much emphasis and energy of expression here, as if the apostle were labouring under the greatness of his theme, and wanted words to express the magnitude of his conception. This is the third thing which he was particularly desirous they should know--that they should be fully acquainted with the power of God in the salvation of men. He refers not merely to the power which he had evinced in their salvation, but also to what the gospel was able to accomplish, and which they might yet experience. The "power" referred to here, as exercised towards believers, does not refer to one thing merely. It is the whole series of the acts of power towards Christians which results from the work of the Redeemer. There was power exerted in their conversion. There would be power exerted in keeping them. There would be power in raising them up from the dead, and exalting them with Christ to heaven. The religion which they professed was a religion of power. In all the forms and stages of it, the power of God was manifested towards them, and would be until they reached their final inheritance.

To us-ward. Towards us, or in relation to us.

Who believe. Who are Christians.

According to the working of his mighty power. Marg., The might of his power. This should be taken with the clause in the following verse, "which he wrought in Christ;" and the meaning is, that the power which God has exerted in us is in accordance with the power which was shown in raising up the Lord Jesus. It was the proper result of that, and was power of a similar kind. The same power is requisite to convert a sinner which is demanded in raising the dead. Neither will be accomplished but by omnipotence, Eph 2:5; and the apostle wished that they should be fully apprised of this fact, and of the vast power which God had put forth in raising them up from the death of sin. To illustrate this sentiment is one of his designs in the following verses; and hence he goes on to show that men, before their conversion, were "dead in trespasses and sins;" that they had no spiritual life; that they were the "children of wrath;" that they were raised up from their death in sin by the same power which raised the Lord Jesus from the grave, and that they were wholly saved by grace, Eph 2:1-10. In order to set this idea of the power which God had put forth in their regeneration in the strongest light, he goes into a magnificent description of the resurrection and exaltation of the Lord Jesus, and shows how that was connected with the renewing of Christians. God had set him over all things. He had put all things under his feet, and had made principalities and dominions everywhere subject to him. In this whole passage, Eph 1:19-23, 2:1-10, the main thing to be illustrated is the POWER which God has shown in renewing and saving his people; and the leading sentiment is, that the SAME power is evinced in that which was required to raise up the Lord Jesus from the dead, and to exalt him over the universe.

(i) "to us-ward" Ps 110:3 (2) "mighty power" "the might of his power" Verse 20. Which he wrought in Christ. Which he exerted in relation to the Lord Jesus when he was dead. The power which was then exerted was as great as that of creation. It was imparting life to a cold and "mangled" frame. It was to open again the arteries and veins, and teach the heart to beat and the lungs to heave. It was to diffuse vital warmth through the rigid muscles, and to communicate to the body the active functions of life. It is impossible to conceive of a more direct exertion of power than in raising up the dead; and there is no more striking illustration of the nature of conversion than such a resurrection.

And set him at his own right hand. The idea is, that great power was displayed by this, and that a similar exhibition is made when man is renewed and exalted to the high honour of being made an heir of God. On the fact that Jesus was received to the right hand of God, Mk 16:19 Acts 2:33.

In the heavenly places. Eph 1:3. The phrase here evidently means in heaven itself.

(a) "raised him from the dead" Acts 2:24,32 Verse 21. Far above all principality. The general sense in this verse is, that the Lord Jesus was exalted to the highest conceivable dignity and honour. Comp. Php 2:9, Col 2:10. In this beautiful and most important passage, the apostle labours for words to convey the greatness of his conceptions, and uses those which denote the highest conceivable dignity and glory. The main idea is, that God had manifested great power in thus exalting the Lord Jesus, and that similar power was exhibited in raising up the sinner from the death of sin to the life and honour of believing. The work of religion throughout was a work of power; a work of exalting and honouring the dead, whether dead in sin or in the grave; and Christians ought to know the extent and glory of the power thus put forth in their salvation. The word rendered "far above"-- υπερανω--is a compound word, meaning high above, or greatly exalted. He was not merely above the ranks of the heavenly beings, as the head; he was not one of their own rank, placed by office a little above them, but he was infinitely exalted over them, as of different rank and dignity. How could this be if he were a mere man, or if he were an angel? The word rendered "principality" --αρχης--means, properly, the beginning; and then the first, the first place, power, dominion, pre-eminence, rulers, magistrates, etc. It may refer here to any rank and power, whether among men or angels, and the sense is, that Christ is exalted above all.

And power. It is not easy to distinguish between the exact meaning of the words which the apostle here uses. The general idea is, that Christ is elevated above all ranks of creatures, however exalted, and by whatever name they may be known. As in this he refers to the "world that is to come," as well as this world, it is clear that there is a reference here to the ranks of the angels, and probably he means to allude to the prevailing opinion among the Jews, that the angels are of different orders. Some of the Jewish rabbis reckon four, others ten orders of angels, and they presume to give them names according to their different ranks and power. But all this is evidently the result of mere fancy. The Scriptures hint, in several places, at a difference of rank among the angels, but the sacred writers do not go into detail. It may be added that there is no improbability in such a subordination, but it is rather to be presumed to be true. The creatures of God are not made alike; and difference of degree and rank, as far as our observation extends, everywhere prevails. On this verse Rom 8:38.

Dominion. Gr., Lordship.

And every name that is named. Every creature of every rank.

Not only in this world. Not only above all kings, and princes, and rulers of every grade and rank on earth

But also in that which is to come. This refers undoubtedly to heaven. The meaning is, that he is supreme over all.

(b) "above all principality" Php 2:9 Verse 22. And hath put all things under his feet. 1Cor 15:27.

And gave him to be the head over all things. Appointed him to be the supreme Ruler.

To the Church. With reference to the church, or for its benefit and welfare. Jn 17:2. The universe is under his control and direction for the welfare of his people.

(1.) All the elements--the physical works of God--the winds and waves-- the seas and rivers---all are under him, and all are to be made tributary to the welfare of the church.

(2.) Earthly kings and rulers; kingdoms and nations are under his control. Thus far Christ has controlled all the wicked rulers of the earth, and they have not been able to destroy that church which he redeemed with his own blood.

(3.) Angels in heaven, with all their ranks and orders, are under his control with reference to the church. Heb 1:14. Comp. Mt 26:53.

(4.) Fallen angels are under his control, and shall not be able to injure or destroy the church. Mt 16:18. The church, therefore, is safe. All the great powers of heaven, earth, and hell, are made subject to its Head and King; and no weapon that is formed against it shall prosper.

(c) "all things" Ps 8:6, Mt 28:16 (*) "gave him" "appointed" Verse 23. Which is his body. This comparison of the church with a person or body, of which the Lord Jesus is the head, is not uncommon in the New Testament. 1Cor 11:3; 1Cor 12:27; Eph 4:15, Eph 4:16.

The fulness of him. The word here rendered fulness-- πληρωμα means, properly, that with which anything is filled, the filling up, the contents. Rom 11:12. The exact idea here, however, is not very dear, and interpreters have been by no means united in their opinions of the meaning. It seems probable that the sense is, that the church is the completion or filling up of his power and glory. It is that without which his dominion would not be complete, he has control over the angels and over distant worlds, but his dominion would not be complete without the control over his church; and that is so glorious, that it fills up the honour of the universal dominion, and makes his empire complete. According to Rosenmuller, the word fulness here means a great number or multitude; a multitude, says he, which, not confined to its own territory, spreads afar, and fills various regions. Koppe also regards it as synonymous with multitude or many, and supposes it to mean all the dominion of the Redeemer over the body--the church. He proposes to translate the whole verse, "He has made him the Head over his church, that he might rule it as his own body--the whole wide state of his universal kingdom." "This," says Calvin, (in loc.,)" is the highest honour of the church, that the Son of God regards himself as in a sense imperfect unless he is joined to us. The church constitutes the complete body of the Redeemer. A body is complete when it has all its members and limbs in proper proportions; and those members might be said to be the completion, or the filling-up, or the fulness--πληρωμα--of the body or the person. This language would not, indeed, be such as would usually be adopted to express the idea now; but this is evidently the sense in which Paul uses it here. The meaning is, that the church sustains the same relation to Christ which the body does to the head. It helps to form the entire person. There is a close and necessary union. The one is not complete without the other. And one is dependant on the other. When the body has all its members in due proportion, and is in sound and vigorous health, the whole person then is complete and entire. So it is to be in the kingdom of the Redeemer. He is the head; and that redeemed church is the body, the fulness, the completion, the filling-up of the entire empire over which he presides, and which he rules. On the meaning of the word fulness πληρωμα-the reader may consult Storr's Opuscula, vol. i., pp. 144--187, particularly pp. 169--183. Storr understands the word in the sense of full or abundant mercy, and supposes that it refers to the great benignity which God has shown to his people, and renders it, "The great benignity of him who filleth all things with good, as he called Jesus from the dead to life, and placed him in heaven, so even you, sprung from the heathen, who were dead in sin on account of your many offences in which you formerly lived, etc.--hath he called to life by Christ." This verse, therefore, he would connect with the following chapter, and he regards it all as designed to illustrate the great power and goodness of God. Mr. Locke renders it, "Which is his body, which is completed by him alone," and supposes it means, that Christ is the head, who perfects the church by supplying all things to all its members which they need. Chandler gives an interpretation in accordance with that which I have first suggested, as meaning that the church is the full "complement" of the body of Christ; and refers to AElian and Dionysius Halicarnassus, who use the word "fulness" or πληρωμα as referring to the rowers of a ship. Thus, also, we say that the ship's crew is its "complement," or that a ship or an army has its complement of men; that is, the ranks are filled up or complete. In like manner, the church will be the filling-up, or the complement, of the great kingdom of the Redeemer--that which will give completion or perfectness to his universal dominion.

Of him. Of the Redeemer.

That filleth all in all. That fills all things, or who pervades all things. 1Cor 12:6; 1Cor 15:28. Comp. Col 3:11. The idea is, that there is no place where he is not, and which he does not fill; and that he is the source of all the holy and happy influences that are abroad in the works of God. It would not be easy to conceive of an expression more certainly denoting omnipresence and universal agency than this; and if it refers to the Lord Jesus, as seems to be indisputable, the passage teaches not only his supremacy, but demonstrates his universal agency, and his omnipresence--things that pertain only to God. From this passage we may observe,

(1.) that just views of the exaltation of the Redeemer are to be obtained only by the influence of the Spirit of God on the heart, Eph 1:17-19. Man, by nature, has no just conceptions of the Saviour, and has no desire to have. It is only as the knowledge of that great doctrine is imparted to the mind, by the Spirit of God, that we have any practical and saving acquaintance with such an exaltation. The Christian sees him, by faith, exalted to the right hand of God, and cheerfully commits himself and his all to him, and feels that all his interests are safe in his hands.

(2.) It is very desirable to have such views of an exalted Saviour. So Paul felt when he earnestly prayed that God would give such views to the Ephesians, Eph 1:17-20. It was desirable in order that they might have a right understanding of their privileges; in order that they might know the extent of the power which had been manifested in their redemption; in order that they might commit their souls with confidence to him. In my conscious weakness and helplessness; when I am borne down by the labours, and exposed to the temptations of life; when I contemplate approaching sickness and death, I desire to feel that that Saviour to whom I have committed my all is exalted far above principalities and powers, and every name that is named. When the church is persecuted and opposed; when hosts of enemies rise up against it, and threaten its peace and safety, I rejoice to feel assured the Redeemer and Head of the church is over all, and that he has power to subdue all her foes and his.

(3.) The church is safe. Her great Head is on the throne of the universe, and no weapon that is formed against her can prosper, he has defended it hitherto in all times of persecution, and the past is a pledge that he will continue to protect it to the end of the world. (4.) Let us commit our souls to this exalted Redeemer. Such a Redeemer we need--one who has all power in heaven and earth. Such a religion we need--that can restore the dead to life. Such hope and confidence we need as he can give--such peace and calmness as shall result from unwavering confidence in him who filleth all in all.

(d) "the fulness" 1Cor 12:12, Col 1:18,24