EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

Subdivision B.

UNIVERSAL NEED OF RIGHTEOUSNESS.

1:18-3:20.

I.

NEED OF RIGHTEOUSNESS BY THE GENTILES.

1:18-32.

      18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hinder the truth in unrighteousness ["For" is intended to introduce a direct proof as to the statement in verse 17, thus: The righteousness of God of which the apostle has been speaking is revealed to a man by his faith; i. e., it is seen only by the believing, for all that others see revealed towards man's unrighteousness is wrath. In other words, only God's gospel reveals this righteousness, and it is addressed to and received by faith. God's other revelations seen in nature reveal no pardoning, justifying grace; but show, in the visitations of terrible judgments, retributions, punitive corrections, deaths, etc., that God pours out the fruits of his displeasure on the wickedness of men, whether it be sin against himself (ungodliness), or sin against the laws and precepts which he has given (unrighteousness), either sin being a stifling of the truth which they knew about God, by willful indulgences in unrighteousness. The apostle is here speaking of the Gentiles; he discusses the case of the Jews separately later on. The precepts, [302] truth, etc., to which he refers are, therefore, not those found in the Old Testament Scriptures, which were known to the Jews; but those which were traditionally handed down by and among the heathen from the patriarchal days. "All the light," as Poole says, "which was left in man since the fall"]; 19 because that which is known of God is manifest in them; for God manifested it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse [and God reveals his wrath against them, because that which is known of God, i. e., the general truths as to his nature and attributes, is manifested unto them; for God himself so manifested it, causing his invisible attributes, even his power, divinity, etc., to be constantly and clearly revealed in the providential working of nature from the hour of creation's beginning, until now, that they may be without excuse for sin, and so justly punishable]: 21 because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened. [And they were without excuse, for when they knew God they did not worship him according to the knowledge which they had, nor did they praise him for his benefits; but they erred in their mind, thus making their whole inner man senseless and dark, not having the light of truth with which they started. The phrase, "vain in their reasonings," means that their corrupt lives corrupted their minds, for, as Tholuck observes, "religious and moral error is always the consequence of religious and moral perversity." As Calvin expresses it: "They quickly choked by their own depravity the seed of right knowledge before it grew to ripeness."] 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. [Vaunting their wisdom, these wicked ones made fools of themselves, so that they exchanged the glory of the [303] immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man, or even images of baser things, as birds, beasts and reptiles. The audacity of the attempt to reason God out of existence has invariably turned the brain of man (Ps 53:1), and the excess of self-conceit and vanity developed by such an undertaking has uniformly resulted in pitiable folly. In the case of the ancients it led to idolatry. Reiche contended that idolatry preceded monotheism, and that the better was developed out of the worse; but history sustains Paul in presenting idolatry as a decline from a purer form of worship "For," says Meyer, "heathenism is not the primeval religion from which man might gradually have risen to the true knowledge of the wisdom of God, but is, on the contrary, the result of a falling away from the known original revelation of the true God in his works." Paul does not say that they exchanged the "form" of God for that of an idol, for God is sensuously perceived as glory, or shekinah, rather than as form. Hence, Moses asked to see, not the form, but the glory of God (Ex. 33:18-22). The Greeks and Romans preferred the human form as the model for their idols, but the Egyptians chose the baser, doubtless because, having been longer engaged in the practice of idolatry, their system was more fully developed in degradation. The ibis, the bull, the serpent and the crocodile of the Egyptians give us the complements of Paul's catalogue. Schaff sees in the phrase "likeness of an image" a double meaning, and interprets it thus: "The expression refers both to the grosser and the more refined forms of idolatry; common people saw in the idols the gods themselves; the cultivated heathen regarded them as symbolical representations."] 24 Wherefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts unto uncleanness, that their bodies should be dishonored among themselves: 25 for that they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. [Wherefore, finding them living in lust, God ceased to restrain or protect them from evil (Gen. 6:3), and abandoned them to the uncleanness toward which their lust incited them, that they [304] might dishonor their bodies among themselves to the limit of their lustfulness, as a punishment for dishonoring and abandoning him. He did this because they had exchanged the truth of God (which from the start they had hindered in unrighteousness, vs. 18), i. e., the truth respecting God and his law and worship, for the sham of idolatry and the false worship pertaining thereto, and because they had given to the creature that inward reverence and outward service which was due to the Creator, thus preferring the creature to the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. "'Blessed' is not the word signifying happy, rendered blessed in Matt. 5:3-11; 1 Tim. 1:11; 6:15; but the word signifying praised, adored, extolled; i. e., worthy to be praised, etc. In the New Testament this word is applied to none but to God only; though the cognate verb is used to express the good wishes and hearty prayers of one creature for another, as well as praise to God--comp. Heb. 11:20, 21; Jas. 3:9"--Plumer.] 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile passions: for their women changed the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was due. [In this horrible picture Paul shows in what way they dishonored themselves among themselves. The sin of sodomy was common among idolaters. The apostle tells us that this depth of depravity was a just punishment for their departure from God. Petronius, Suetonius, Martial, Seneca, Virgil, Juvenal, Lucian and other classic writers verify the statements of Paul. Some of their testimonies will be found in Macknight, Stuart and other larger commentaries.] 28 And even as they refused [did not deem it worthy of their mind] to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind [i. e., minds rejected in turn by God as unworthy], to do those things which are not fitting [indecent, immoral]; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness [inordinate desire to accumulate property [305] regardless of the rights of others: a sin which is not condemned by the laws of any country on the globe, and which is the source of unrest in all nations], maliciousness [a readiness to commit crime without provocation, a chronic state of illwill and misanthropy]; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity; whisperers [talebearers, those who slander covertly, chiefly by insinuation--Prov. 16:28] 30 backbiters [outspoken slanderers], hateful to God [many contend that this should read "haters of God," since Paul is enumerating the vices of men, and not God's attitude toward them. Others, following the reading in the text, see in these words what Meyer calls "a resting-point in the disgraceful catalogue"--a place where Paul pauses to reveal God's moral indignation toward the crimes particularized. But Alford takes the words in a colloquial sense as describing the political informers of that period. "If," says he, "any crime was known more than another, as 'hated by the God,' it was that of informers, abandoned persons who circumvented and ruined others by a system of malignant espionage and false information," though he does not confine the term wholly to that class], insolent, haughty, boastful [these three words describe the various phases of self-exultation, which, a sin in all ages, was at that time indulged in to the extent of blasphemy, for Cicero, Juvenal and Horace all claim that virtue is from man himself, and not from God], inventors of evil things [inventors of new methods of evading laws, schemers who discover new ways by which to unjustly accumulate property, discoverers of new forms of sensuous, lustful gratification, etc.], disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding [those who have so long seared their consciences as to be unable to determine between right and wrong even in plain cases. The loss of moral understanding is very apparent among habitual liars, whose minds have become so accustomed to falsehood that they are no longer able to discern the truth so as to accurately state it], covenant-breakers [those who fail to keep their promises and agreements], without natural affection [those having an abnormal lack of love towards parents, children, kindred, etc.], unmerciful: [306] 32 who, knowing the ordinance of God, that they that practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but also consent with them that practise them. [All were not guilty of all these sins, but each was guilty of some of them. Though many of these evils still exist in Christian lands, they do so in spite of Christianity; but then they existed because of idolatry. Lard observes that the Gentiles, starting with the knowledge of God, descended to the foolishness of idolatry. At this point God abandoned them, and they then began their second descent, and continued till they reached the very base and bottom of moral degradation, as indicated in the details given above. The Gentiles had traditions and laws, founded on original revelations, declaring these things sinful; and, though they knew that death resulted from sin, yet they not only defied God and persisted in their sins, but even failed to condemn them in others; yea, they encouraged each other to commit them. Such, then, was the helpless, hopeless state of the Gentiles. When they were justly condemned to death for unrighteousness, God revealed in his gospel a righteousness unto life that they might be saved.] [307]

II.

NEED OF RIGHTEOUSNESS BY THE JEWS.

2:1-29.

      1 Wherefore thou art without excuse, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest dost practise the same thing. [The apostle, it will be remembered, is proving the universal insufficiency of human righteousness, that he may show the universal need of a revealed righteousness. Having made good his case against one part of the human race--the Gentiles, he now proceeds to a like proof against the other part--the Jews. He does not name them as Jews at the start, for this would put them on the defensive, and made his task harder. He speaks to them first as individuals, [307] without any reference to race, for the Jew idolized his race, and would readily admit a defect in himself which he would have denied in his race. But Paul, by thus convicting each of sin in his own conscience, makes them all unwittingly concede sin in all, even though Jews. It was the well-known characteristic of the Jews to indulge in pharisaical judgment and condemnation of others (Matt. 7:1; Luke 18:14), especially the Gentiles (Acts 11:3; Gal. 2:15). The apostle knew, therefore, that his Jewish readers would be listening with gloating elation to this his castigation of the Gentiles, and so, even in this their moment of supreme self-complacency, he turns his lash upon them, boldly accusing them of having committed some of the things which they condemned, and, hence, of being in the same general state of unrighteousness, though, perhaps, on a somewhat less degraded plane. To condemn another for his sin is to admit that the sin in question leads to and justifies condemnation as to all who commit it, even including self. The thought of this verse is, as indicated by its opening "Wherefore," closely connected with the preceding chapter, and seems to form a climax, thus: The simple sinner is bad, the encourager of sin in others is worse, but the one who condemns sins in others, yet commits them himself, is absolutely defenseless and without excuse. Whitby has collected from Josephus the passages which show that Paul's arraignment of the Jews is amply justifiable.] 2 And we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against them that practice such things. 3 And reckonest thou this, O man, who judgest them that practise such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? [The argument may be paraphrased thus: Yielding to the force of argument, that like sin deserves like condemnation, even you, though most unwillingly, condemn yourself. How much more freely, therefore, will God condemn you (1 John 3:20). And we know that you can not escape, for the judgment of God is according to truth; i. e., without error or partiality against the doers of evil. And do you vainly imagine, O man, that when thine own moral sense [308] is so outraged at evil that thou must needs condemn others for doing it, that thou, though doing the same evil thyself, shalt escape the judgment of God through any partiality on his part? Self-love, self-pity, self-justification, and kindred feeling, have, in all ages, caused men to err in applying the warnings of God to themselves. Among the Jews this error took the form of a doctrine. Finding themselves especially favored and privileged as children of Abraham, they expected to be judged upon different principles from those of truth, which would govern the judgment and condemnation of the rest of mankind. This false trust is briefly announced and rebuked by John the Baptist (Matt. 3:7-9), and afterwards more clearly and fully defined in the Talmud in such expressions as these: "Every one circumcised has part in the kingdom to come." "All Israelites will have part in the world to come." "Abraham sits beside the gates of hell, and does not permit any wicked Israelite to go down to hell." The same error exists to-day in a modified form. Many expect to be saved because they are the children of wealth, culture, refinement; because they belong to a civilized people; because their parents are godly; or even, in some cases, because they belong to a certain lodge, or order.] 4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? 5 but after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up for thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; 6 who will render to every man according to his works [The apostle here touches upon a second error which is still common among men. It is, as Cook says, that "vague and undefined hope of impunity which they do not acknowledge even to themselves." God's present economy, which sends rain upon the just and the unjust, and which postpones the day of punishment to allow opportunity for repentance, leads untold numbers to the false conclusion that God is slack as to his judgment, and that he will ever be so. They mistake for indifference or weakness that longsuffering grace of his which exercises patience, hoping [309] that he may thereby lead men to repentance (2 Pet. 3:9). Those who, by hardness of heart, steel themselves against repentance, thereby accumulate punishments which will be inflicted upon them in the day when God reveals that righteous judgment which has been so long withheld or suspended, for God is righteous, and he will render to every man in that day according to his works, after the following described manner]: 7 to them that by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and incorruption, eternal life: 8 but unto them that are factious, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath and indignation [to those who, by steadfastly leading a life of work (which, as Olshausen observes, no man can do, according to Paul, save by faith in Christ), seek for glory (and the future state is one of unparalleled grandeur--John 17:24; Rev. 21:24), honor (and the future state is an honor; bestowed, though unmerited, as a reward--Matt. 25:23, 40) and incorruption (which is also a prime distinction between the future and the present life--1 Cor. 15:42), eternal life shall be given. But God's wrath and indignation shall be poured upon those who serve party and not God (and the Jews were continually doing this--Matt. 23:15; Gal. 6:12, 13), and obey not the truth (John 8:31, 32), but obey unrighteousness], 9 tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that worketh evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Greek; 10 but glory and honor and peace to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek: 11 for there is no respect of persons with God. [Paul here reiterates the two phases of God's judgment which he has just described. He does this to emphasize their universality--that they are upon every man, regardless of race. The punishment shall come upon Jew and Gentile alike; but the Jew, because of pre-eminence in privilege, shall have pre-eminence in suffering (Luke 12:47, 48). The blessings also shall be received alike, but here also the Jew, having improved his privileges, and having more pounds to start with (Luke 19:16-19), shall have pre-eminence in reward in as far as he has attained pre-eminence in life; for [310] there is no unfair partiality or unjust favoritism with God. The man born in a Christian home stands to-day in the category then occupied by the Jew. He will be given greater reward or greater punishment according to his use or abuse of privilege.] 12 For as many as have sinned without the law [Gentiles] shall also perish without the law [i. e., without being judged by the expressed terms of the law]: and as many as have sinned under the law [the Jews] shall be judged by the law [i. e., his conduct shall be weighed by the terms of it, and his punishment shall be according to its directions. Thus the Gentiles, having the lesser light of nature, and the Jews, having the greater light of revelation, were alike sinners. By his altars, sacrifices, etc., the Gentile showed that nature's law smote his conscience as truly as the clear, expressed letter of the Mosaic precept condemned the Jew. Thus both Jew and Gentile were condemned to perish; i. e., to receive the opposite of salvation, as outlined in verse 7]; 13 for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified [Of course, the Jew had a great advantage over the Gentile in that he possessed the law--Paul himself concedes this (3:1, 2); but this mere possession of the law, and this privilege of hearing and knowing the will of God, by no means justified the sinner. Jews and Gentiles alike had to seek justification through perfect obedience to their respective laws, and no one of either class had ever been able to render such obedience. The Jew had the advantage of the Gentile in that he had a clear knowledge of the Lord's will, and a fair warning of the dire consequences of disobedience. The Gentile, however, had advantages which offset those of the Jews, thus making the judgments of God wholly impartial. If the law which directed him was less clear, it was also less onerous. In a parenthesis the apostle now sets forth the nature of the law under which the Gentiles lived; he evidently does this that he may meet a supposed Jewish objection, as though some one said, "Since what you say applies to those who have a divine law given to them, it can not apply to the Gentiles, since they possess no law at all." It is to this [311] anticipated objection that Paul replies]; 14 (for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves; 15 in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them) [The meaning here may be quickly grasped in the following paraphrase: Jews and Gentiles are alike sinners, yet each had a chance to attain legal justification; the former by keeping an outwardly revealed law, the latter by obeying an inwardly revealed one. Now, the Gentiles have such a law, as appears from their general moral conduct; for when those who do not have the law of Moses, do, by their own inward, natural promptings, the things prescribed by the law of Moses, they are a law unto themselves, having in themselves the threefold workings of law, in that the guidance of their heart predisposes them to know the right, the testimony of their conscience bears witness with their heart that the right is preferable, and lastly, after the deed is done, their thoughts or inward reasonings accuse or excuse them according as their act has been wrong or right. These well-known psychological phenomena, observable among the Gentiles, are proof conclusive that they are not without law, with its power and privilege of justification. Therefore, all are not sinners because there is respect of persons with God, for all have the possibility of attaining justification]; 16 in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ. [This verse relates to the thought interrupted by the parenthesis; i. e., the thought of verse 13. Not hearers, but doers, shall be justified in the judgment-day, that day when God shall judge the secrets of men's lives and judge them, as my gospel further reveals, through Jesus Christ as judge. The Jewish Scriptures revealed a judgment-day, and the thought was not unfamiliar to the Gentiles; but it remained for Paul's gospel to reveal the new truth that Jesus was to be the Judge. Paul started with the thought that, in judging another, a sinner condemned himself (v. 2:3). [312] Having discussed that thought and shown that it is applicable to the Jew, because God's judgments rest on moral and not on national or ceremonial ground, the apostle here resumes it once more, in connection with verse 13, that he may show that if the law of Moses did not shield from condemnation, neither would circumcision.] 17 But if thou bearest the name of a Jew, and restest upon the law, and gloriest in God, 18 and knowest his will, and approvest the things that are excellent, being instructed out of the law, 19 and art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them that are in darkness, 20 a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having in the law the form of knowledge of the truth; 21 thou therefore that teacheth another, teachest thou not thyself? [But if doers, and not hearers, are not justified, why do you put your confidence in mere hearing, and such things as are analogous to it? Since only the doers of the law are justified, why do you vainly trust that you will be acceptable because you bear the proud name of Jew (Gal. 2:15; Phil. 3:5; Rev. 2:9), rather than the humble one of Gentile? Why do you rest confidently merely because you possess a better law than the Gentiles, because you glory in the worship of the true God (Deut. 4:7), and in knowing his will (Ps. 147:19, 20), and in being instructed so as to approve the more excellent things of the Jewish religion above the debauchery of idolatry? Of what avail are these things when God demands doing and not mere knowing? And of what profit is it to you if the law does give you such a correct knowledge of the truth that you are to the Gentiles, yea, even to their chief philosophers, as a guide to the blind, a light to the benighted, a wise man among fools, a skilled teacher among children? Of what avail or profit is it all if, with all this ability, you teach only others and fail to teach yourself? The apostle next shows, in detail, how truly the Jew had failed to profit by his knowledge, so as to become a doer of the law.] thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? 22 thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that [313] abhorrest idols, dost thou rob temples? 23 thou who gloriest in the law, through thy transgression of the law dishonorest thou god? [These questions bring out the flagrant inconsistencies between Jewish preaching and practice. Teaching others not to steal, the Jew, though probably not often guilty of technical theft, was continually practically guilty of it in his business dealings, wherein, by the use of false weights, extortion, cheating, etc., he gathered money for which he had returned no just equivalent. Unchastity was also a besetting sin of the Jews, showing itself in the corrupt practice of permitting divorces without reasonable or righteous cause (Matt. 19:8, 9). Some of the most celebrated Rabbis are, in the Talmud, charged with adultery. Paul's accusation, that the Jews robbed temples, has been a puzzle to many. This robbing of the temple, according to the context of his argument, must have been a species of idolatry, for he is charging the Jews with doing the very things which they condemned. They condemned stealing, and stole; they denounced adultery, and committed it; they abhorred idols, yet robbed the temples of them that they might worship them. Such is the clear meaning, according to the context. But we have no evidence that the Jews of Paul's day did such a thing. The charge is doubtless historic. The Jewish history, in which they gloried, showed that the fathers, in whom they had taken so much pride, had done this thing over and over again, and the same spirit was in their children, though more covertly concealed (comp. Matt. 23:29-32). The last question sums up the Jewish misconduct: glorying in the law, as is shown in verses 17-20, they yet dishonored the God of the law by transgressing it, as is shown in this paragraph.] 24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you, even as it is written. [Isa. 52:5; Ezek. 36:20-23. By their conduct the Jews had fulfilled the words of Isaiah and the meaning of Ezekiel. The Gentiles, judging by the principle that a god may be known by his worshipers, had, by reason of the Jews, judged Jehovah to be of such a character that their judgment became a blasphemy. (See also Ezek. 16:51-59.) Thus Paul [314] took from the Jew a confidence of divine favor, which he had because he possessed the law. But the law was not the sole confidence of the Jew, for he had circumcision also, and he regarded this rite as a seal or conclusive evidence that he belonged to the people of God, being thereby separated by an infinite distance from all other people. He looked with scorn and contempt on the uncircumcised, even using the term as an odious epithet (Gen. 34:14; Ex. 12:48; 1 Sam. 17:26; 2 Sam. 1:20; Isa. 52:1; Ezek. 28:10.) The apostle, therefore, turns his fire so as to dislodge the Jew from this deceptive stronghold. He drives him from his hope and trust in circumcision.] 25 For circumcision indeed profiteth, if thou be a doer of the law: but if thou be a transgressor of the law, thy circumcision is become uncircumcision. 26 If therefore the uncircumcision keep the ordinances of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be reckoned for circumcision? [In verse 25 the apostle takes up the case of the Jew; in verse 26 that of the Gentile. By circumcision the former entered into a covenant with God, and part of the terms of his covenant was an agreement to obey the law. Thus the law was superior to circumcision, so much so that it, as it were, disfranchised or expatriated an Israelite for disobedience, despite his circumcision. On the contrary, if an uncircumcised Gentile obeyed the law, then the law naturalized and received him into the spiritual theocracy, notwithstanding his lack of circumcision. The verses are not an argument, but a plain statement of the great truth that circumcision, though beneficial to the law-abiding, has no power to withstand the law when condemning the lawless. In short, the Jew and Gentile stood on equal footing, for, though the Jew had a better covenant (circumcision) and a better law, yet neither attained to salvation, for neither kept the law.] 27 and shall not the uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who with the letter and circumcision art a transgressor of the law? [The Gentile, remaining as he was by nature, uncircumcised, if he fulfilled the law, shall, in his turn, judge the Jew, who was so ready to judge him [315] (v. 1), who, with a written law and circumcision, was yet a transgressor. The judging referred to is probably the indirect judging of comparison. On the day of judgment, the Gentile, with his poor advantages, will condemn, by his superior conduct, the lawlessness of the Jew. Comp. Matt. 11:21, 22; Luke 11:31, 32.] 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh: 29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. [He is not a Jew in God's sight (though he is, of course, such in the sight of the world) who is simply one without; i. e., by being properly born of Jewish parents, nor is that a circumcision in God's sight (though it is in the sight of the world) which is merely fleshly. But he is the real, divinely accepted Jew who is one within; i. e., who has in him the spirit of Abraham and the fathers in whom God delighted (John 1:47). His life may be hid from men, so that they may see nothing in him to praise, but it is praiseworthy in the sight of God, and circumcision is not that outward compliance with the letter of the law--literal circumcision--but that inward spiritual compliance with the true meaning of circumcision, the cutting off of all things that are impure and unholy, and that make the heart unworthy of an acceptance into the household of God.]

III.

JEWISH PRIVILEGE DOES NOT DIMINISH GUILT,
AND THE SCRIPTURES INCLUDE BOTH
JEW AND GENTILE ALIKE UNDER SIN.

3:1-20.

      1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what is the profit of circumcision? [Paul's argument was well calculated to astonish the Jews. If some notable Christian should argue conclusively that the Christian and the infidel stood on an equal footing before God, his argument would not be more [316] startling to the church than was that of Paul to the Jews of his day. They naturally asked the two questions found in this first verse, so Paul places the questions before his readers that he may answer them.] 2 Much every way: first of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God. [To the circumcised Jew God had given the Scriptures. The law, the Psalms, the prophets were his, with all the revelations and promises therein contained. They revealed man's origin, his fall and his promised redemption; they also described the Redeemer who should come, and prepared men to receive him and to believe him. How unspeakable the advantage of the Jew in possessing such a record. But the Jew had not improved this advantage, and so we may regard him as asking the apostle this further question, "But, after all, the greatest part of us have not believed on this Jesus, and so what advantage were our oracles to us in reality?" The apostle now answers this objection.] 3 For what if some were without faith? shall their want of faith make of none effect the faithfulness of God? 4 God forbid: yea, let God be found true, but every man a liar; as it is written [Ps. 51:4], That thou mightest be justified in thy words, And mightest prevail when thou comest into judgment. [True, the Jew, by unbelief, had failed to improve his advantage in possessing the Scriptures; but that did not alter the fact that he had had the advantage. He had failed, but God had not failed. Had the unbelief of the Jew caused God to break his promises, then indeed might the advantage of the Jew have been questioned, for in that case it would have proven a vanishing quantity. But, on the contrary, God had kept faith, and so the advantage, though unimproved, had been an abiding quantity. And this accords with the holiness and sinlessness of God. He is ever blameless, and because he is so, he must ever be assumed to be so, even though such an assumption should involve the presumption that all men are false and untrue, as, indeed, they are in comparison with him: for David testified to the incomparable righteousness of God, that it was a righteousness which acquitted God of all unfaithfulness to his [317] words, and which causes him to prevail whenever men call him to account or pass judgment upon him.] 5 But if our unrighteousness commendeth the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who visiteth with wrath? (I speak after the manner of men.) [I am not expressing my own views, but those of the man who objects to the truth I am presenting.] 6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world? 7 But if the truth of God through my lie abounded unto his glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? 8 and why not (as we are slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say ), Let us do evil, that good may come? whose condemnation is just. [But some of you Jews, objecting to my argument, will say, "According to your statements, the unbelief and disobedience of us Jews, with reference to God's Scripture, drew out, displayed and magnified the faithfulness and goodness of God in fulfilling his Scripture. Therefore, since our unbelief, etc., added to the glory of God by commending his righteousness, is not God unjust to punish us for that unbelief, etc., since it works such praiseworthy results? "My answer is, God forbid that sin should become righteousness, for if sin ceases to be sinful, how shall God judge the world, since then there shall be no sin to be condemned or punished? You see, then, the absurdity of your question, since it is a practical denial of the divinely established fact that there is to be a day of judgment. Sin, though it may, by its contrast, display the righteousness of God, is nevertheless utterly without merit. As an illustration, my case is analogous to yours. You arraign me before the bar of Jewish opinion, even as you yourselves are arraigned before the bar of God; yet you would not permit me to use before you the very same argument which you are seeking to use before God. You Jews regard me as a sinner, and charge me with being untrue to the Jewish religion, and with being a false representative of it, in that I declare it to be fulfilled in the gospel. Now, my lie (as you consider it), in this respect, redounds to the glory of God by being a contrast to his truthfulness. But would you Jews [318] acquit me of the sin of heresy if I should make use of this your argument? And, again, if your reasoning is correct, why should I not, as certain, meaning to slander me, report that I do, and affirm that I say, Let us do evil that good may come? But those who avow such principles are justly condemned. Thus Paul showed that, in condemning him (though falsely), they condemn the very argument which they were seeking to affirm in verse 5.] 9 What then? Are we [Jews] better than they? [The Gentiles.] No, in no wise: for we before laid to the charge both of Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin [Having met the effort of the Jew to make an exception in his case, as set forth in verse 5, the apostle now reaffirms his original charge of universal unrighteousness, in which both Jews and Greeks were involved. This charge he further proves by an elaborate chain of quotations, taken from the Old Testament, and chiefly from the Psalms]; 10 as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one; 11 There is none that understandeth, There is none that seeketh after God; 12 They have all turned aside, they are together become unprofitable; There is none that doeth good, no, not so much as one [Ps. 14:1-3; 53:1-3]: 13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; With their tongues they have used deceit [Ps. 5:9]: The poison of asps is under their lips [140:3]: 14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness [Ps. 10:7]: 15 Their feet are swift to shed blood; 16 Destruction and misery are in their ways; 17 And the way of peace have they not known [Isa. 59:7, 8]: 18 There is no fear of God before their eyes. [Ps. 36:1. The above quotations are placed in logical order. "The arrangement is such," says Meyer, "that testimony is adduced: first, for the state of sin generally (vs. 10-12); second, the practice of sin in word (vs. 13, 14) and deed (vs. 13-17); and third, the sinful source of the whole--v. 18."] 19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it speaketh to them that are under the law [i. e., to the Jews]; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be brought under the judgment [319] of God: 20 because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for through the law cometh the knowledge of sin. [Having, by his quotations from the Old Testament, shown that the Jew was sinful, the apostle sets forth the result of this sin. Does the law provide any remedy? Is the Jew right in hoping that it shall afford him immunity from his guilt? These questions have been for some time before the apostle, and they now come up for final answer. We, says he, universally accept the truth that when the law speaks, it speaks to those who are under it. If, therefore, it has no voice save condemnation--and it has no other--and if that voice is addressed particularly to the Jew--and it is--his state is no better than that of the Gentile; he is condemned; and the law thus speaks for this very purpose of silencing the vain, unwarranted confidence of the Jew, that he may see himself in the same condition as the Gentile, and brought, with the rest of the world, under the condemnation of God; and there can be no legal escape from this condemnation, because, by the works of the law, it is impossible for humanity, in its frailty, to justify itself in God's sight--nay, the law works a directly contrary result, for through it comes the knowledge and sense of sin, and not the sense of pardon or justification.]