Commentary on Romans; Systematic Theology

WHEN Paul and the other apostles were called to enter npon their important duties, the world was in a deplorable and yet most interesting state. Both Heathenism and Judaism were in the last stages of decay. The polytheism of the (iroeks ami Romans had been carried to such an extent as to shock tho common sense of mankind, and to lead the more intelligent ani"nir them openly to reject and ridicule it. This scepticism had already extended itself to the mass of the people, and become almost universal. As the transition from infidelity to superstition is certain, and generally immediate, all classes of the people were disposed to confide in dreams, enchantments, and other miserable substitutes for religion. The two reigning systems of philosophy, the Stoic and Platonic, were alike insuf ficient to satisfy the agitated minds nf men. The former sternly repressed the best natural feelings of tho soul, incul cating nothing but a blind resignation to the unalterable course of things, and promising nothing beyond an unconscious exist ence hereafter. The latter regarded all religions as but different forms of expressing the same general truths, and represented the whole mythological system as an allegory, as incomprehen sible to the common people, as tin.' pa ires of a book to those who cannot read. This system promised more than it could accomplish. It excited feeling which it could not satisfy, and thus contributed to produce that general ferment which existed at this period. Among the Jews, generally, the state of things was hardly much better. They had. indeed, the form of truo religion, but were in a great measure destitute of its spirit. The Pharisees were contented with the form: the Sadduceea were sceptics; the Essenes were enthusiasts and mystics. Such being the state of the world, men were led to feel the need of some surer guide than either reason or traditi m, arid some better foundation of confidence than either heathen philosophers or Jewish sects could afford. Hence, when the glorious gospel was revealed, thousands of hearts, in all parts of the world, were prepared, by the grace of God, to exclaim, This is all our desire and all our salvation.

The historv of the apostle Paul shows that he was prepared to act in such a state of society. In the first place, lie was born, and probably educated in part, at Tarsus, the capital of Cilicia; a city almost on a level with Athens and Alexandria, for its literary zeal arid advantages. In one respect, it is said by ancient writers to have been superior to either of them. In the other cities mentioned, the majority of students were strangers, but in Tarsus they were the inhabitants themselves.* That Paul passed the early part of his life here is probable, because the trade which he was taught, in accordance with the custom of the Jews, was one peculiarly common in Cilicia. From the hair of the goats, with which that province abounded, a rough cloth was made, Avliich was much used in the manufac ture of tents. The knowledge which the apostle manifests of the Greek authors, 1 Cor. xv. 33, Titus i. 1*2, would also lead us to suppose that he had received at least part of his education in a Grecian city. Many of his characteristics, as a writer, lead to the same conclusion. lit1 pursues, far more than any other of the sacred writers of purely Jewish education, the logical method in presenting truth. There is almost always a regular concatenation in his discourses, evincing the spontane ous exercise of a disciplined mind, even when not carrying out a previous plan. His epistles, therefore, are far more logical than ordinary letters, without the formality of regular disserta tions. Another characteristic of his manner is, that in discuss ing any question, he always presents the ultimate principle on which the decision depends. These and similar characteristics of this apostle are commonly, and probably with justice,;isrribed partly to his turn of mind, and partly to his early education. We learn from the Scriptures themselves, that the Holy Spirit, in employing men as his instruments in conveying truth, did not change their mental habits; he did not make Jews write like Greeks, or force all into the same mould. Each retained his own peculiarities of style and manner, and, there fore, whatever is peculiar to each, is to be referred, not to his inspiration, but to his original character and culture. Vfhilo the circumstances just referred to, render it probable that the apostle's habits of mind were in some measure influenced by his birth and early education in Tarsus, there are others (such as the general character of his style) which show that his residence there could not have been long, and that his education was not thoroughly Grecian. We learn from himself, that he was prin cipally educated at Jerusalem, being brought up, as he says, at the feet of Gamaliel. (Acts xxii. 3.)

This is the second circumstance in the providential prepara tion of the apostle for his work, which is worthy of notice. As Luther was educated in a Roman Catholic seminary, and tho roughly instructed in the scholastic theology of which he was to be the great opposcr, so the apostle Paul was initiated into all the doctrines and modes of reasoning of the Jews, with whom his principal controversy was to he carried on. Tho early adversaries of the gospel were all J"ws. Even in the heathen cities they were so numerous, that it was through them and their proselytes that the church in such places was founded. \\V find, therefore, that in almost all his epistles, the apostle contends with Jewish errorists, the corrupters of the irospel. by means of Jewish doctrines. Paul, the most extensively useful of all the apostles, was thus a thoroughly educated man; a man educated with a special view to the work which he was called to perform. A\ e find, therefore, in this, as in most similar cases, that God effects his purposes by those instruments which he has, in the ordinary course of his providence, specially fitted for their accomplishment.

In the third place, Paul was converted without the interven tion of human instrumentality, and was taught the gospel by immediate revelation. " I certify you, brethren," he says to the Galatians, "that the gospel which was preached of me, was not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." These cir cumstances are important, as he was thus placed completely on a level with the other apostles. He had seen the Lord Jesus, arid could therefore be one of the witnesses of his resurrection;

lie was able to claim the authority of an original inspired teacher and messenger of God. It is obvious that he laid great stress upon this point, from the frequency with which he refers to it. He was thus furnished not only with the advantages of his early education, but with the authority and power of an apostle of Jesus Christ.

His natural character was ardent, energetic, uncompromising, and severe. How his extravagance and violence were subdued by the grace of God, is abundantly evident from the modera tion, mildness, tenderness, and conciliation manifested in all his epistles. Absorbed in the one object of glorifying Christ, he was ready to submit to any tiling, and to yield any thing neces sary for this purpose. lie no longer insisted that others should think and act just as he did. So that they obeyed Christ, he was satisfied; and he willingly conformed to their prejudices, and tolerated their errors, so far as the cause of truth and righteousness allowed. By his early education, by his miracu lous conversion and inspiration, by his natural disposition, and by the abundant grace of God, was this apostle fitted for his work, and sustained under his multiplied and arduous labours.

One of the providential circumstances which most effectually contributed to the early propagation of Christianity, was the dispersion of the Jevrs among surrounding nations. They were widely scattered through the East, Egypt, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy, especially at Home. As they were permitted, throughout the wide extent of the Roman Empire, to worship God according to the traditions of their fathers, synagogues were every where established in the midst of the heathen. The apostles, being Jews, had thus always a ready access to the people. The synagogues furnished a convenient place for regu lar assemblies, without attracting the attention or exciting the suspicion of the civil authorities. In these assemblies they were sure of meeting not only Jews, but the heathen also, and precisely the class of heathen best prepared for the reception of the gospel. The infinite superiority of the pure theism of the Old Testament Scriptures to any form of religion known to the ancients, could not fail to attract and convince multitudes among the pagans, wherever the Jewish worship was established. Such persons became either proselytes or "devout," that is, worship pers of the true God. Being free from the inveterate national and rcligicas prejudices of the Jews, and at the same time con vinced of the falsehood of polytheism, they were the most sus ceptible of all the early hearers of the gospel. It was by converts from among this class of persons, that the churches in all the heathen cities were in a great measure founded. There is abundant evidence that the Jews were very numerous at Home, and that the class of proselytes or devout persons among the Romans was also very large. Fhilo says (Lcgatio in Caium, p. 1041, ed..Frankf.) that Augustus had assigned the Jews a larne district beyond the* Tiber for their residence. lie accounts for their being so numerous, from the fact that the captives car ried thither bv Pompey were liberated by their masters, who found it inconvenient to have servants who adhered so strictly to a religion which forbade constant and familiar intercourse with the heathen. Dion Cassius (Lib. GO, c. 0) mentions that the Jews were so numerous at Home, that Claudius was at first afraid to banish them, but contented himself with forbid ding their assembling together. That he afterwards, on account of the tumults which they occasioned, did banish them from the city, is mentioned by Suetonius (Vita Claudii, c. 2">.) and by Luke, Acts xviii. 2. That the Jews, on the death of Claudius, returned to Home, is evident from the fact that Suetonius and Dion Cassius speak of their being very numerous under the fol lowing rciirns; and also from the contents of this epistle, espe cially the salutations (chap. 10) addressed to Jewish Christians. That the establishment of the Jewish worship at Rome had produced considerable effect on the Romans, is clear from the statements of the heathen writers themselves. Ovid speaks of the synaco^ues as places of fashionable resort; Juvenal (Satire 14) ridicules his countrymen for becoming Jews;* and Tacitua

* Quidam sortiti metuentem sabbata patrem, Kil proctor nubes, cocli nurnon adorant: Kuc distare putant humana carnc suillam, Qua pater abstinuit, raox ct proeputia ponunt. Ilomanas autem soliti contemnere leges, Jiidaicum ediscunt, et servant, ac metuunt jus, Tradidit arcane quodcunque volumine Moses, &C.

(Hist. Lib. 5, ch. 5*) refers to the presents sent by Roman proselytes to Jerusalem. The way was thus prepared for the early reception and rapid extension of Christianity in the impe rial city. When the gospel was first introduced there, or by whom the introduction was effected, is unknown. Such was the constant intercourse between Rome and the provinces, that it is not surprising that some of the numerous converts to Christian ity made in Judea, Asia Minor, and Greece, should at an early period find their way to the capital. It is not impossible that many, who had enjoyed the personal ministry of Christ, and believed in his doctrines, might have removed or returned to Rome, and been the first to teach the gospel in that city. Still less improbable is it, that among the multitudes present at Jeru salem at the day of Pentecost, among whom were " strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes," there were some who carried back the knowledge of the gospel. That the introduction of Christianity occurred at an early period, may be inferred not only from the probabilities just referred to, but from other cir cumstances. When Paul wrote this epistle, the faith of the Romans was spoken of throughout the world, which would seem to imply that the church had already been long established. Aquila and Priscilla, who left Rome on account of the decree of Claudius banishing the Jews, were probably Christians before their departure; nothing at least is said of their having been converted by the apostle. He found them at Corinth, and being of the same trade, he abode with them, and on his departure took them with him into Syria.

The tradition of some of the ancient Fathers, that Peter was the founder of the church at Rome, is inconsistent with the statements given in the Acts of the Apostles. Irenreus (litres. III. 1) says, that "Matthew wrote his gospel, while Peter and Paul were in Rome preaching the gospel and founding the church there." And Eusebius (Chron. ad ann. 2 Claudii) says, - u Peter having founded the church at Antioch, departed for Rome, preaching the gospel." Both these statements are incor rect. Peter did not found the church at Antioch, nor did he

* Pessimus quisque, spretis religionibus patriis, tributa et stipes Ulue congerebat, urde auotae Judaeorum res.

and Paul preach together at Rome. That Peter was not at: Rome prior to Paul's visit, appears from the entire silence of this epistle on the subject; and from no mention being made of the fact in any of the letters written from Rome by Paul duringhis imprisonment. The tradition that Peter ever was at Rome, rests on very uncertain authority. It is first mentioned by Dionysius of Corinth, in the latter half of the second century, and from that time it seems to have been generally received. The account is in itself improbable, as Peter's field of labour was in the East, about Babylon; and as the statement of Diony sius is full of inaccuracies. lie makes Peter and Paul thq founders of the church at Corinth, and makes the same asser tion regarding the church at Rome, neither of which is true. lie also says that Paul and Peter suffered martyrdom at the same time at Rome, which, from the silence of Paul respecting Peter, during his last imprisonment, is in the highest de-Tree improbable.* History, therefore, has left us ignorant of the time when this church was founded, and the persons by whom the work was effected.

The condition of the congregation may be inferred from the circumstances already mentioned, and from the drift of the apostle's letter. As the Jews and proselytes were verv numer ous at Rome, the early converts, as might be expected, were from both these classes. The latter, however, seem greatlv to have predominated, because we find no such evidence of a ten dency to Judaism, as is supposed in the Kpistle to the Galatians. Paul no where seems to apprehend that the church at Rome would apostatize, as the Galatian Christians had already done. And in chapters 14 and 1-5, his exhortations imply that the Gentile party were more in danger of oppressing the Jewish, than the reverse. Paul, therefore, writes to them as Gentiles (chap. i. 13.) and claims, in virtue of his office as apostle to the Gentiles, the right to address them with all freedom and author ity (xv. 16.) The congregation, however, was not composed exclusively of this class; many converts, originally Jews, were included in their numbers, arid those belonging to the other class were more or less under the influence of Jewish opinion?, The apostle, therefore, in this, as in all his other epistles addressed to congregations similarly situated, refutes those doctrines of the Jews which were inconsistent with the gospel, and answers those objections which they and those under their influence were accustomed to urge against it. These different elements of the early churches were almost always in conflict, both as to points of doctrine and discipline. The Jews insisted, to a greater or less extent, on their peculiar privileges and customs; and the Gentiles disregarded, and at times despised the scruples and prejudices of their weaker brethren. The opinions of the Jews particularly controverted in this epistle are, 1. That connection with Abraham by natural descent, and by the bond of circumcision, together with the observance of the law, is sufficient to secure the favour of God. 2. That the blessings of the Messiah's reign were to be con fined to Jews and those who would consent to become prose lytes. 3. That subjection to heathen magistrates was incon sistent with the dignity of the people of God, and with their duty to the Messiah as King.

There are clear indications in other parts of Scripture, ag well as in their own writings, that the Jews placed their chief dependence upon the covenant of God with Abraham, and the peculiar rites and ordinances connected with it. Our Saviour, when speaking to the Jews, tells them, " Say not, We have Abraham to our father; for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abra ham," (Luke iii. 8.) It is clearly implied in this passage, that the Jews supposed that to have Abraham as their father was sufficient to secure the favour of God. The Rabbins taught that God had promised Abraham, that his descendants, though wicked, should be saved on account of his merit. Justin Martyr mentions this as the ground of confidence of the Jews in his day. "Your Rabbins," he says, "deceive them selves and us, in supposing that the kingdom of heaven is pre pared for all those who are the natural seed of Abraham, even though they be sinners and unbelievers." (Dialogue with Tri/pho.) They were accustomed to say, "Great is the virtue of circumcision; no circumcised person enters hell." And one of their standing maxims was, "All Israel hath part in eternal life."*

The second leading error of the Jews was a natural result of the one just referred to. If salvation was secured by con nection with Abraham, then none who were not united to their great ancestor could be saved. There is no opinion of the Jews more conspicuous in the sacred writings, than that they were greatly superior to the Gentiles; that the theocracy and all its blessings belonged to them; and that others could attain even an inferior station in the kingdom of the Messiah only by becoming Jews,

The indisposition of the Jews to submit to heathen magis trates, arose partly from their high ideas of their own dignity, and their contempt for other nations; partly from their erro neous opinions of the nature of the [Messiah's kingdom, and partly, no doubt, fVum the peculiar hardships and oppressions to which thev were exposed. The prevalence of this indisposi tion among them is proved bv its being a matter ot discussion whether it was even lawful to pay tribute to Cassar; by their assertion that, as Abraham's seed, they were never in bondage to any man; and by their constant tumults and rebellions, which led first to their banishment from Home, and finally to the utter destruction of their city. The circumstances of the church at Punne, composed of both Jewish and (Jeiitile con verts; surrounded bv Jews who still insisted on the necessity of circumcision, of legal obedience, and of connection with the family of Abraham, in order to salvation; and disposed on many points to diil'er among themselves, sufficiently account for the character of this epistle.

There are no sufficient data for fixing accurately and cer tainly the chronology of the life and writings of the apostle Paul. It is therefore, in most cases, only by a comparison of various circumstances, that an approximation to the date of the principal events of his life can be made. With regard to this epistle, it is plain, from its contents, that it was written just.13 Paul was about to set out on his last journey to Jerusalem. In the fifteenth chapter he says, that the Christians of Macedonia and Achaia had made a collection for the poor saints in Jeru salem, and that he was on the eve of his departure for that city (ver. 25.) This same journey is mentioned in Acts xx., and occurred most probably in the spring (see Acts xx. 1G) of the year 58 or 59. This date best suits the account of his long imprisonment, first at Cesarca, and then at Rome, of four years, and his probable liberation in 62 or Go. His subsequent labours ancl second imprisonment would fill up the intervening period of two or three years, to the date of his martyrdom, towards the close of the reign of Nero. That this epistle was written from Corinth, appears from the special recommendation of Phcbe, a deaconess of the neighbouring church, who was pro bably the bearer of the letter (chap. xvi. 1;) from the saluta tions of Erastus and Gains, both residents of Corinth, to tho Romans (chap. xvi. 23;) compare 2 Tim. iv. 20, and 1 Cor.

1. 14; and from the account given in Acts xx. 2, 3, of Paul's journey through Macedonia into Greece, before his departure for Jerusalem, for the purpose of carrying the contributions of the churches for the poor in that city.

That this epistle was written by the apostle Paul, admits of no reasonable doubt. 1. It, in the first place, purports to be his. It bears his signature, and speaks throughout in his name.

2. It has uniformly been recognised as his. From the apostolic age to the present time, it has been referred to and quoted by a regular scries of authors, and recognised as of divine authority in all the churches. It would be requisite, in order to disprove its authenticity, to account satisfactorily for these facts, on the supposition of the epistle being spurious. The passages in the early writers, in which this epistle is alluded to or cited, are very numerous, and may be seen in Lardner's Credibility, Vol. II. 3. The internal evidence is no less decisive in its favour, (a) In the first place, it is evidently the production of a Jew, familiar with the Hebrew text and the Septuagint ver sion of the Old Testament, because the language and style are

§uch as no one, not thus circumstanced, could adopt; and be cause the whole letter evinces such an intimate acquaintance with Jewish opinions and prejudices. (6) It agrees perfectly in style and manner with the other epistles of this apostle, (c) It is, in the truth and importance of its doctrines, and in the eleva tion and purity of its sentiments, immeasurably superior to any uninspired production of the age in which it appeared. A com parison of the genuine apostolic writings with the spurious pro ductions of the first and second centuries, affords one of tho strongest collateral evidences of the authenticity and inspiration of the former, (d) The incidental or undesigned coincidences, as to matters of fact, between this epistle and other parts of tho New Testament, are such as to afford the clearest evidence of its having proceeded from the pen of the apostle. Compare Rom. xv. 25 — 31 with Acts xx. 2, 3, xxiv. 17, 1 Cor. xvi. 1—4, 2 Cor. viii. 1—4, ix. 2, Rom. xvi. 21—23 with Acts xx. 4, Rom. xvi. 3, et seqq. with Acts xviii. 2, 18—26, 1 Cor. xvi. 19, &c., (see Paley's Hone Puuliiue.) 4. Besides these positive proofs, there is the important negative consideration, that there are no grounds for questioning its authenticity. There are no discre pancies between this and other sacred writings; no counter testimony among the early Fathers; no historical or critical difficulties which must be solved before it can be recognised aa the work of Paul. There is, therefore, no book in the Bible, and there is no ancient book in the world, of which the authen ticity is more certain than that of this epistle.

The epistle consists of three parts. The first, which includes the first eight chapters, is occupied in the discussion of the doc trine of justification and its consequences. The second, embrac ing chs. ix. — xi., treats of the calling of the Gentiles, the rejec tion and future conversion of the Jews. The third consists of practical exhortations and salutations to the Christians at Rome.

THE FIRST PART the apostle commences by saluting the Roman Christians, commending them for their faith, and expressing his desire to see them, and his readiness to preach the gospel at Rome. This readiness was founded on the conviction that tho gospel revealed the only method by which men can be saved, viz., by faith in Jesus Christ, and this method is equally applicable to all mankind, Gentiles as well as Jews, chap. i. 1 — 17. Paul thus introduces the two leading topics of the epistle.

In order to establish his doctrine respecting justification, ho first proves that the Gentiles cannot be justified by their own works, chap. i. 18 — 39; and then establishes the same position in reference to the Jews, clis. ii. iii. 1—20. Having thus shown that the method of justification by works is unavailable for sinners, he unfolds that method which is taught in the gospel, confirms in chs. iv. and v. The obvious objection to the doc trine of gratuitous acceptance, that it must lead to the indulgence of sin, is answered, and the true design and operation of the law are exhibited in chs. vi. and vii.; and the complete security of all who confide in Christ is beautifully unfolded in chap. viii.

In ariniing against the Gentiles. Paul assumes the principle that God will punish sin, chap. i. 18, and then proves that they are justly chargeable both with impiety and immorality, because, though they possessed a competent knowledge of God, they did not worship him, but turned unto idols, and gave themselves up to all kinds of iniquity, chap. i. 19 — 32.

He commences his argument with the Jews by expanding the general principle of the divine justice, and especially insisting on God's impartiality by showing that he will judge all men, Jews and Gentiles, according to their works, and according to the light they severally enjoyed, chap. ii. 1 — 10. He shows that the Jews, when tried by these rules, are as justly and certainly exposed to condemnation as the Gentiles, chap. ii. 17 — 29.

The peculiar privileges of the Jews afford no ground of hope that they will escape being judged on the same principles with other men, and when thus judged, they are found to be guilty before God. All men therefore are, as the Scriptures abun dantly teach, under condemnation, and consequently cannot be justified by their own works, chap. iii. 1 — 20.

The gospel proposes the only method by which God will justify men — a method which is entirely gratuitous; the condi tion of which is faith; which is founded on the redemption of Christ; which reconciles the justice and mercy of God; hum bles man; lays the foundation for an universal religion, and establishes the law, chap. iii. 21 — 31.

The truth of this doctrine is evinced from the example of Abraham, the testimony of David, the nature of the covenant made with Abraham and his seed, and from the nature of the law. lie proposes the conduct of Abraham as an example and encouragement to Christians, chap. iv. 1—25.

Justification by faith in Christ secures peace with God, pre sent joy, and the assurance of eternal life, chap. v. 1 — 11. The method, therefore, by which God proposes to save sinners, is analogous to that by which they were first brought under con demnation. As on account of the offence of one, sentence lias passed on all men to condemnation; so on account of the right eousness of one, all are justified, chap. v. 12 — 21.

The doctrine of the gratuitous justification of sinners cannot lead to the indulgence of sin, because such is the nature of union with Christ, and such the object for which he died, that all who receive the benefits of his death, experience the sanctifying influence of his life, chap. vi. 1 — 11. Besides, the objection in question is founded on a misapprehension of the effect and design of the law, and of the nature of sanctification. Deliverance from the bondage of the law and from a legal spirit is essential to holiness. When the Christian is delivered from this bondage, he becomes the servant of God, arid is brought under an influ ence which effectually secures his obedience, chap. vi. 12 — 23.

As, therefore, a woman, in order to be married to a second husband, must first be freed from her former one, so the Chris tian, in order to be united to Christ, and to bring forth fruit unto God, must first be freed from the law, chap. vii. 1 — 6.

This necessity of deliverance from the law, docs not arise from the fact that the law is evil, but from the nature of the case. The law is but the authoritative declaration of duty; which cannot alter the state of the sinner's heart. Its real operation is to produce the conviction of sin (vs. 7 — 13,) and, in the renewed mind, to excite approbation and complacency in the excellence which it exhibits, but it cannot effectually secure the destruction of sin. This can only be done by the grace of God in Jesus Christ, chap. vii. 7 — 25.

Those who are in Christ, therefore, are perfectly safe. They are freed from the law; they have the indwelling of the lifegiving Spirit: they are the children of God; they are chosen, called, and justified according to the divine purpose; and they are the objects of the unchanging love of God, chap. viii. 1 — 39. THE SECOND PART of the epistle relates to the persons to whom the blessings of Christ's kingdom may properly be offered, and the purposes of God respecting the Jews. In entering upon this subject, the apostle, after assuring his kindred of his affec tion, establishes the position that God has not bound himself to regard as his children all the natural descendants of Abraham, but is at perfect liberty to choose whom he will to be heirs of his kingdom. The right of God to have mercy on whom he will have mercy, he proves from the declarations of Scripture, and from the dispensations of his providence. He shows that this doctrine of the divine sovereignty is not inconsistent with the divine character or man's responsibility, because God simply chooses from among the undeserving whom he will as the objects of his mercy, and leaves others to the just recom pense of their sins, chap. ix. 1 — 24.

God accordingly predicted of old, that he would call the Gentiles and reject the Jews. The rejection of the Jews was on account of their unbelief, chs. ix. 25 — 83, x. 1 — 5. The two methods of justification are then contrasted for the purpose of showing that the legal method is impracticable, but that the method proposed in the gospel is simple and easy, and adapted to all men. It should, therefore, agreeably to the revealed purpose of God, be preached to all men, chap. x. 6 — 21.

The rejection of the Jews is not total; many of that genera tion were brought into the church, who were of the election of grace, chap. xi. 1 — 10. Neither is this rejection final. There is to be a future and general conversion of the Jews to Christ, and thus all Israel shall be saved, chap. xi. 11 — 36.

THE THIRD or practical part of the epistle, consists of direc tions, first, as to the general duties of Christians in their vari ous relations to God, chap, xii.; secondly, as to their political or civil duties, chap, xiii.; and thirdly, as to their ecclesiastical duties, or those duties which they owe to each other as mem bers of the church, chs. xiv. xv. 1 — 13.

The epistle concludes with some account of Paul's labours and purposes, chap. xv. 14 — 33, and with the usual saluta tions, chap. xvi.

Tins chapter consists of two parts. The first extends to the close of vcr. IT, and contains the general introduction to the epistle. The second commences with vcr. 18, and extends to the end of the chapter: it contains the argument of the apostle to prove that the declaration contained in vs. 10, 17, that justification can only be obtained by faith, is true with regard to the heathen.

Tins section consists of two parts. The first from vs. 1 to 7 inclusive, is a salutatory address; the second, from vs. 8 to 17, is the introduction to the epistle. Paul commences by an nouncing himself as a divinely commissioned teacher, set apart to the preaching of the gospel, vcr. 1. Of this gospel, he says, 1. That it was promised, and of course partially exhibited in the Old Testament, vcr. 2. 2. That its great subject -yas Jesus Christ, vcr. 3. Of Christ he says, that he was, as to his human nature, the Son of David; but as to his divine nature, the Son of God, vs. 3, 4. From this Divine Person he had received his office as an apostle. The object of this office was to bring men to believe the gospel; and it contemplated all 2 (17)

nations as the field of its labour, vcr. 5. Of course the Romans were included, vcr. 6. To the Roman Christians, therefore, he wishes grace and peace, vcr. 7. Thus far the salutation.

Having "shown in what character, and by what right he ad dressed them, the apostle introduces the subject of his letter by expressing to them his respect and affection. He thanks God, not only that they believed, but that their faith was uni versally known and talked of, ver. 9. As an evidence of his concern for them, he mentions, 1. That he prayed for them constantly, vcr. 9. 2. That he longed to see them, vs. 10, 11. 3. That this wish to sec them arose from a desire to do them good and to reap some fruit of his ministry among them, as well as among other Gentiles, vs. 12, 13. Because he was under obligation to preach to all men, wise and unwise, he was therefore ready to preach even at Rome, vs. 14, 15. This readiness to preach arose from the high estimate he entertained of the gospel. And his reverence for the gospel was founded not on its excellent system of morals merely, but on its efficacy in saving all who believe, whether Jews or Gentiles, ver. 16. This efficacy of the gospel arises from its teaching the true method of justification, that is, the method of justification by faith, ver. II. It will be perceived how naturally and skil fully the apostle introduces the two great subjects of the epistle — the method of salvation, and the persons to whom it may properly be offered.

VERSE 1. Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called an apostle. Agreeably to the ancient mode of epistolary address, the apostle begins with the declaration of his name and office. It was his office which gave him the right to address the believers at Rome, and elsewhere, with that tone of authority which per vades all his epistles. Speaking as the messenger of Christ, he spake as he spake, as one having authority, and not as an ordinary teacher.

The original name of the apostle was Saul, ^d demanded. He is first called Paul in Acts xiii. 9. As this change of his name is mentioned:n the paragraph which contains the account of the conversion ot Sergius Paulus, the proconsul of Cyprus, some have supposed that the name was assumed in compliment to that distinguished convert. This supposition does not seem to accord with the apostle's character, and is, on other grounds, less probable than either of the two following. First, as it was not unusual, among the Jews, to change the name of a person in consequence of some remarkable event, as in the case of Abraham and Jacob, Gen. xvii. 5, xxxii. 8; or when he was advanced to some new office or dignity, Gen. xli. 45, Dan. i 6, 7; so that a new name is sometimes equivalent to a new dignity, Rev. ii. 17, it may be supposed that the apostle re ceived the name of Paul, when called to the office of an apostle. This supposition is favoured by the consideration that he received the name soon alter he entered upon the public exer cise of his apostleship, and by the fact that Simon was called Cephas when called to be an apostle, John i. 4^, Matt. x. L\ and that James and John were called Boanerges, Mark iii. 17. Hence Theophylact says that it was in order that even in this matter, he should not be behind the very chief of the apos tles, that Saul was called Paul. Second, as it was very com mon for those Jews who had much intercourse with the hea then to bear two names, one Jewish and the other Greek or Roman, which names were sometimes entirely distinct, as llillel and Pollio, sometimes nearly related as Silas and Silvanus, it is very probable that this was the case with the apostle. He was called Saul among the Jews, and Paul among the Gentiles; and as he was the Apostle of the Gentiles, the latter name became his common designation. As this change was, however, made or announced at an epoch in the apostle's history, Acts xiii. 0, the two explanations may be united. "The only sup position," says ])r. J. A. Alexander, in his comment on Acts xiii. 0, kv which is free from all these difficulties, and affords a satisfactory solution of the facts in question, is, that this was the time fixed by Divine authority for Paul's manifes tation as Apostle of the Gentiles, and that manifestation was made more conspicuous by its coincidence with the triumph over a representative of unbelieving and apostate Judaism, and the conversion of an official representative of Rome, whose name was identical with his own apostolic title."

In calling himself a servant (bondsman) of Jesus Christ, he may have intended either to declare himself the derciJant and worshipper of Christ, as all Christians are servants (slaves) of Christ, Eph. vi. 6; or to express his official relation to the Church as the minister of Christ. This is the more probable explanation, because, in the Old Testament rnn1? "DS is a com mon official designation of any one employed in the immediate service of God, Joshua i. 1, xxiv. 29, Jcr. xxix. 19, Isaiah xlii. 1; and because in the New Testament we find the same usage, not only in the beginning of several of the epistles, as "Paul and Timothy, the servants of Jesus Christ," Phil. i. 1. "James, the servant of God and of Jesus Christ," James i. 1. "Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ," 1 Peter i. 1; but also in other cases where the word ooy/oc is interchanged with didxovoz minister. Comp. Col. i. T, iv. 7, 12. It is, therefore, a general official designation of which, in the present case, apostle is the specific explanation. "Apostolatus miriisterii est species." Calvin. It has also been properly remarked, that as the expression, servant of Christ, implies implicit obedience and subjection, it supposes the Divine authority of the Redeemer. That is, we find the apostle denying that he was the servant of men, rejecting all human authority as it regards matters of faith and duty, and yet professing the most absolute subjection of conscience and reason to the authority of Jesus Christ.

x/y-oz cbrotfroAoc, called an apostle. Paul was not only a servant of Christ, but by Divine appointment an apostle. This idea is included in the word x/'/roc, which means not only called, but chosen, appointed; and the x/^<rrc, or vocation, as well of believers to grace and salvation, as of the apostles to their office is uniformly ascribed to God or Christ; see Gal. i. 1, 1 Cor. i. 1, Tit, i. 1, Gal. i. 15. As the immediate call of Christ was one of the essential requisites of an apostle, Paul means to assert in the use of the word */^'roc that he wa-s neither self-appointed nor chosen by men to that sacred office

The word d~t')(7Tu/.o^ occurs in its original sense of messenger in several cases in the New Testament. John xiii. 16, o'jx earc d~6ffToAoz ttzi*«>v "o7j xs/KfiavTOZ V.'JTOV. Phil. ii. 25, "* Ercatppb ot~o^... bfww os cbrotfTo/ov. Comp. iv. 18. In 2 Cor. viii. 23, Paul speaking of the brethren who were with him, calls them; ToursffTev says Chrysostom, u~b IxxtyGtujv

,T£/^$£vr£C- Theopliylact adds, xal •fc&poTovrftivrs.z. Our translators, therefore, are doubtless correct in rendering this phrase, messengers of the churches. As a strict official desig nation, the word apostle is confined to those men selected and commissioned by Christ himself to deliver in his name the message of salvation. It appears from Luke vi. 13, that the Saviour himself gave them this title. "And wliea it was day, he called his disciples, and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles." If it be asked, why this name was chosen? it is perhaps enough to say, that it was peculiarly appropriate. It is given to those who were sent by Christ to perform a particular service, who were therefore properly called messengers. There is no necessity to resort for an explanation of the term, to the fact that the word rrVr mes senger, was applied sometimes to the teachers and ministers of the synagogue, sometimes to plenipotentiaries sent by the San hedrim to execute some ecclesiastical commission.

The apostles, then, were the immediate messengers of Christ, appointed to bear testimony to what they had seen and heard. "\e also skill bear witness," said Christ, speaking to the twelve, "because ye have been with me from the beginning." John xv. 2G. This was their peculiar office; hence when Judas fell, one, said Peter, who has companioned with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, must be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. Acts i. 21. To be an apostle, therefore, it was necessary to have seen Christ after his resurrection, 1 Cor. ix. 1, and to have a knowledge of his life and doctrines derived immediately from himself. Without this no man could be a witness, lie would only report what he had heard from others, he could bear no independent testimony to what he himself had seen and heard. Christ, therefore, says to his disciples, after his resurrection, "Ye shall be my witnesses," Acts i. 8, and the apostles accordingly constantly presented themselves in this character. Acts ii. 32, iii. 15, xiii. 31. "We are witnesses," said Peter, spoiking of himself and fellow-apostles, "of all things which he did, both in the land of Judea, and in Jerusalem." Acts x. 39. When Paul was called to be an apostle, the Saviour said to him. UI have appeared unto tliec for this purpose, to make nice a minister and a witness of these things which tliou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thce." Acts xxvi. 16. We accordingly find, that whenever Paul was called upon to defend his apostlcship, he strenuously asserted that he was appointed not of men nor by man, but by Jesus Christ; and as to his doctrines, that he neither received them of man, neither was he taught them, but by revelation of Jesus Christ. Gah i. 12.

As the testimony which the apostles were to bear related to all that Jesus had taught them, it was by preaching the gospel that they discharged their duty as witnesses. Hence Paul says, c- Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the gos pel." 1 Cor. i. 17. To the elders of Ephesus he said, "I count not my life dear unto me, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God." Acts xx. 24.

To irivc authority to this testimony the apostles were inspired, and as religious teachers infallible. John xiv. 26, xvi. 13. They h;id the power of working miracles, in confirmation of their mission. Matt. x. 8, and the Acts of the Apostles passim. This power they could communicate to others by the laying on of their hands. Acts ix. 15, 17, 18, xix. 6. This is what is meant by giving the Holy Ghost, for the apostles never claimed the power of communicating the sanctifying influences of the Spirit. Nor was the power of giving the Spirit, in the sense above-mentioned, peculiar to them, for we read that Ananias, a disciple, was sent to Paul that he might receive the Holy Ghost. Acts ix. 17. The apostles seem also to have had the gift of "discerning spirits," 1 Cor. xii. 10, and of remitting sins. John xx. 23. They ordained presbyters over the congregations gathered by their ministry. Acts xiv. 2->, &c.; and exercised a general jurisdiction over the churches. 1 Cor. v. 8—5, 2 Cor. x. C, 8, 11, 1 Tim. i. 20. The apos tles, therefore, were the immediate messengers of Jesus Christ, sent to declare his gospel, endued with the Holy Spirit, render ing them infallible as teachers, and investing them with mira culous powers, arid clothed with peculiar prerogatives in the organization and government of the Church.

It is in explanation of his apostolic office, and in the further assertion of his divine commission that Paul adds, atfco^tapsvo^ £<f~C eiMx.'ffshov $£oD, separated unto the gospel of G~od. *A<popi£eeu is to limit off, to separate, to select from among others. It is so used in Levit. xx. 24, 26, "I am the Lord your God, which have separated you from other people." In the same sense, in Gal. i. 15, uwhen it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb;" that is, who singled me out, or chose me. It is obvious, therefore, that the apostle here refers to his appoint ment by God to his cilice. In Acts xiii. 2, it is said, "• Separate (a<popiaa.Tz) unto me Barnabas and Saul," where a separation not to the ministry, much loss to the apostleship, but to a special mission is referred to. Paul's designation to ollice was neither of man. nor bv man. Gal. i. 1. The words £:;• sbaffsAeou, unto tlie gospel, express the object to winch he was devoted when thus separated from the mass of his brethren; it was to preach the gospel. The divine origin of the gospel is asserted in calling it the tjuxjH'/ t'f <i'nl. It is the glad annunciation which God makes to men of the pardon of sin, of restoration to his favour, of the renovation of their nature, of the resurrection of the body, and of eternal life.

VKKSI-: -, Which he promised afore. That is, the gospel which Paul was sent to preach, was the same system of grace and truth, which from the beginning had been predicted and partiallv unfolded in the writings of the Old Testament. The reason \vhv the apostle here adverts to that fact probably was, that one of the strongest proofs of the divine origin of the gospel is found in the prophecies of the Old Testament. The advent, the character, the work, the kingdom of the Messiah, are there predicted, and it was therefore out of the Scriptures that the apostles reasoned, to convince the people that Jesus is the Christ; and to this connection between the two dispcnsa tion.s they constantly refer, in proof of their doctrines. See ch. iii. 21, iv. 8, ix. 27,:>:>, x. 11, 20. Comp. Luke xxiv. 44, John xii. 10, Acts x. 4-J.

By hiH pr<>/>/!t'fx in t//e JL>ly Scriptures. As in Scripture the term rroo^'rjjc? Heb. X"i:, is applied to any one who spake by inspiration as the ambassador of God and the interpreter of his will; -oo^-caw here includes all the Old Testament writers, whether prophets in the strict sense of the term, or teachers, or historians. Meyer indeed insists that the line of the prophets begins with Samuel, according to Acts iii. 24 — "all the prophets from Samuel, and those who follow after," and therefore that the earlier writers of the Old Testament are not here included. But Moses was a prophet, and what is here expressed by the words "his prophets," is explained by the phrase "the law and the prophets," in ch. iii. 21.

By the Holy Scriptures must of course be understood, those writings which the Jews regarded as holy, because they treated of holy tilings, and because they were given by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost,

VERSE 8. Concerning his Son. These words are either to be connected with ebaffehoV) the gospel concerning his Son; or with Tiposnr^'jfslXaTOj which he promised concerning his Son. The sense in either case is much the same. As most com mentators and editors regard the second verse as a parenthesis, they of course adopt the former construction; but as there is no necessity for assuming any parenthesis, the natural gram matical connection is with KposTrr/ffsttaTO. The personal object of the ancient promises is the Son of God.

It is a well known scriptural usage, that the designations employed in reference to our Lord are sometimes applied to him as a historical person, God and man, and sometimes exclu sively to one or the other of the two natures, the divine and human, which enter into the constitution of the theanthropos. Thus the term Son designates the Logos in all those passages in which he is spoken of as the Creator of all things; at other times it designates the incarnate Logos; as when it is said, "the Son shall make you free." Sometimes the same term is used in the same passage in reference first to the incarnate Word, and then to the Word as the second person of the Trinity. Thus in Ileb. i. 2, it is said, "Hath spoken unto us by his Son, (the historical person, Jesus Christ,) by whom (the eternal Word) he made the worlds." So here, "concerning his Son," means the Son of God as clothed in our nature, the Word made flesh; but in the next clause, " declared to be the Son of God," the word Son designates the divine nature of Christ. In all cases, however, it is a designation implying participation of the diviue nature Christ is called the Son of God because he is consubstantial with the Father, and therefore equal to him in power and glory. The term expresses the relation of the second to the first person in the Trinity, as it exists from eternity. It is therefore, as applied to Christ, not a term of office, nor expressive of any relation assumed in time. He was and is the Eternal Son. This is proved from John i. 1 — 14, where the term vlbz is interchanged with /o/'o^. It was the Son, therefore, who in the beginning was with God, who was God, who created all things, in whom was life, who is the light of men, who is in the bosom of the Father. In John v. IT — ->1, Christ calls himself the Son of God, iu a sense which made him equal to the Father, having the same power, the same author ity, and a right to the same honour. In John x. _!(J — 4:2, Christ declares God to be his Father in such a sense as to make him self God, one with the Father; and he vindicates his claim to this participation of the divine nature by appealing to hi.-, works. In Col. i. 1-) — IT, he is said as Son to be the image of the invisible God, the exact exemplar, and of course the revealer of the Divine nature; the Creator of all things that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible. In lleb. i. 4 — -(3, the title Son is adduced as proof that he is superior to the angels, and entitled to their worship. He is therefore called God's proper Son, wroc, ll()in. viii. 82, (corap. narepa i'wuv £/£)'£ rov t)~oi>, John v. IS;) his own Son, c^roO, Horn, viii. o; his only b<'</<>ttrii Mm, //^op^'c, John i. 14, 1/S, iii. 10, IS, 1 John iv. 9. Hence giving, sending, not sparing this Son, is said to be the highest conceivable evidence of the love of God, John iii. KJ, Horn. viii. o2, 1 John iv. 9. The histo rical sense of the terms /o?-o~, zlxclw, y.'oc, xpcoroToxoc, as learned from the Scriptures and the usus loquendi of the apos tolic age, shows that they must, in their application to Christ, be understood of his Divine nature.

Who was made of tJtc sc<'d of l)<ivi<1. As flvotw.^ from the assumed theme fi^to, to be</et, signifies to be<jln to be, to come into existence, it is often used in reference to descent or birth, T&o/t&cv Ix p,varx6c, Gal. iv. 4; r^ kf&rftr^s rsxva, 1 Pet. iii. 6. "Made of the seed of David," is therefore equivalent to '-born of the seed of David." That the Messiah was to be

The limitation xara adoxa, according to the flesh, obviously implies the superhuman character of Jesus Christ. Were he a mere man, it had been enough to say that he was of the seed of David; but as he is more than man, it was necessary to limit his descent from David to his human nature. That the word ffdto£ here means human nature is obvious both from the scrip tural usage of the word, and from the nature of the case. See John i. 14, Rom. ix. 5, 1 Tim. iii. 16, 1 John iv. 2, 3. It is not the flesh or body, as opposed to the soul, but the human, as opposed to the divine nature, that is intended. Neither does ffdoz here mean the purely material element with its organic life, the eco/m and ^y/jy, to the exclusion of the ^vsD/^a, or rational principle, according to the Apollinarian doctrine, but the entire humanity of Christ, including " a true body and a reasonable soul." This is the sense of the word in all the parallel passages in which the incarnation is the subject. As when it is said, "The Word was made flesh," John i. 11; or, "God was manifested in the flesh," 1 Tim. iii. 10. These are explained by saying, "He was found in fashion as a man," Philip, ii. 8. The word therefore includes everything which con stitutes the nature which a child derives from its progenitors.

VERSE 4. Declared to be the Son of God. The word om^tv means, 1. To limit, or bound, and, in reference to ideas, to define. 2. To determine. Luke xxii. 22, Acts ii. 23, lleb. iv. 7. 8. To appoint, or constitute. Acts x. 42. b w{oiafj.svo<; u~b TO~J $£oD xoiTYjZ ^tbvTtov zu.l Vz.x[>wv. Acts xvii. 31. This last sense is given by some few commentators to bpta&evroz in this passage. The apostle would then say that Christ was appointed, or constituted the Son of God, by or after his resurrection, But this is inconsistent with what he elsewhere teaches, viz that Christ was the Son of God before the foundation of the world, Col. i. 15. As shown above, Son of God is not a title of office, but of nature, and therefore Christ cannot be said to have been constituted the Son of God. This interpretation also would involve the latter part of the verse in great difficul ties. Hence even those commentators who most strenuously insist on adhering to the signification of words, arc constrained, ex necessitate loci, to understand bocad-s^oz here declaratively, or in reference to the knowledge of men. That is, when Christ is said to be constituted the Son of God, we are not to understand that he became or was made Son, but was, in the view of men, thus determined.*

The Vulgate reads, qui praedestinatus cst, which version is followed by most of the lloman Catholic interpreters, and by Grotius. This rendering is probably founded on the reading, Kf>oopi<7&zi<7oz, which, although old, has little evidence in its favour. Neither is the sense thus expressed suited to the con text. Christ was not predestinated to be the Son of God. lie was such from eternity.

With power; TO'j-sarc, snys Theophylact, d~o r7^ o'j^dazioc TWV GfiiLZ'.uw (Ly l~oUc; Theodoret also understands these words to refer to the miracles which Jesus, by the power of the Holy Ghost, wrought in confirmation of his claim to be the Son of God. The former of these commentators takes ev o'j^dfjL-fj '/.a.-(l r^z~ju.(L, l~ dvaardazcoz, as indicating tliree distinct sources of proof of the Sonship of Christ. lie was proved by his miraculous power, by the Holy Spirit either as given to him, or as by him given to his people, (the latter is Tlieoplivlact's view,) and by his resurrection, to be the Son of God. But the change of the prepositions, and especially the antithetical structure of the sentence, by which -/j/.ra Tti,s~jtjta is obviously opposed to '/JJ~<L ao.tr/jf., are decisive objec tions to this interpretation. Others propose to connect In ou^dtLzi with UiU'Jj >SW in power, for powerful Son; a more common and more natural construction is to connect them with bo'.<jf}ii<-uZ) proved, or declared with power, for powerfully, effectually proved to be the Son of God. lie was declared with emphasis to be the Son of God, it a ut ejus rei plenissima et certissima sit fides. "\Vinzer.

* Es bleibt claher, says De Wette, niclits flbrig, als den Gedanken dea Bestimmen modalisch, d. h. in Beziehung, auf die menschliclie Erkenntniss, zu nehmen. Much to the.same purpose Fritzsc'he says, Fuerit euim Christus, ut Hiit, ante raunduin Dei films, hoc certe apparet, eurn inter mortaks iis demum rebus talem a Deo constitutum esse, sine quibus cum esse Dei filium homi nes cognoscere non potuissent, velut reditu ex inferis.

According to the Spirit of holiness. As just remarked, these words are in antithesis with xara advxa; as to the flesh he was the Son of David, as to the Spirit the Son of God. As ffap£ means his human nature, weo/ia can hardly mean anything else than the higher or divine nature of Christ. The word TTvsDua may he taken in this sense in 1 Tim. iii. 16, idwuvfty iv ^s'jfiart. justified by the Spirit, i. e. he was shown to be just, his claims were all sustained by the manifestations of his divine nature, i. e. of his divine power and authority. Heb. ix. 14, oc dea Trvsy/JLaroz auovioo, who with an eternal Spirit offered himself unto God. 1 Pet. iii. 18 is a more doubtful passage. The genitive fcfuoawr^ is a qualification of 7rv£iy/a, Spirit of holiness; the Spirit whose characteristic is holiness. This expression seems to be here used, to prevent ambiguity, as Holy Spirit is appropriated as the designation of the third person of the Trinity. As the word holy often means august, venerandus, so dytcoawrj expresses that attribute of a person which renders him worthy of reverence; Trvs^a kfioxjuvrfi is, therefore, Spiritus summe venerandus, the $£or^c, divine nature, or Godhead, which dwelt in Jesus Christ; the Logos, who in the beginning was with God, and was God, and who became flesh and dwelt among us. That -vvjtia docs not here mean the spiritual state of exaltation of Christ, is plain; first, because the word is never so used elsewhere; and, secondly, because it is inconsis tent with the antithesis to xara adoxa. Those who understand the phrase ''Spirit of holiness" to refer to the Holy Spirit, either, as before remarked, suppose that the apostle refers to the evidence given by the Spirit to the Sonship of Christ, hence Calvin renders xara Trj/s^ua per Spiritum; or they consider him as appealing to the testimony of the Spirit as given in the Scriptures. ' Christ was declared to be the Son of God, agreeably to the Spirit.' To both these views, how ever, the same objection lies, that it destroys the antithesis.

!£• d.va.Gi6.(jz.toz, yzxnojy, is rendered by Erasmus, Luther, and others, after the resurrection from the dead. It was not until Christ had risen that the evidence of his Sonship was complete, or the fulness of its import known even to the apostles. But it is better suited to tin context, and more agreeable to the Scrip ture, to consider the resurrection itself as the evidence of his

Sonsliip. It was by the resurrection that he was proved to be the Son of God. " God," says the apostle, "will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained, whereof he hath given assurance unto all, in that he hath raised him from the dead." Acts xvii. 31. The apostle Peter also says, that "God hath begotten us to a lively hope by the resurrec tion of Jesus Christ from the dead." 1 Pet. i. 3. Comp. iii. 21, Acts xiii. 35, xxvi. 23, 1 Cor. xv. 20. In these and many other passages the resurrection of Christ is represented as the great, conclusive evidence of the truth of all that Christ taught, and of the validity of all his claims. If it be asked how the resurrection of Christ is a proof of his being the Son of God, it may be answered, first, because he rose by his own power.. He had power to lay down his life, and he had power to take it u^ain. John x. 18. This is not inconsistent with the fact taught in so many other passages, that he was raised by the power of the Father, because what the Father docs the Son does likewise; creation, and all other external works, are ascribed indifferently to the Father, Son, and Spirit. But in the second place, as Christ had openly declared himself to be the Son of God, his rising from the dead was the seal of God to the truth of that declaration. Had he continued under the power of death. God would thereby have disallowed his claim to be his Son: but as he raised him from the dead, he publicly acknowledged him; saying, Thou art my Son, this day have I declared thee such. " If Christ be not risen, then is our preach ing vain," says the apostle, ikand your faith is also vain. But now is Christ risen, and become the first fruits of them tlint slept."

Jesus Christ our Lord. These words are in apposition with TO~J ulu~j auToit of the third verse; " his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord." All the names of Christ are precious to his people. lie is called Jesus, titti'iour, because he saves his people from their sins. Matt. i. 21. The name Christ, i. e. Messiah, Anointed, connects him with all the predictions and promises of the Old Testament. lie is the anointed prophet, priest, and king, to whom all believing eyes had been so long directed, and on whom all hopes centred. lie is x'joio- fj/ww our Lord. This word indeed is often used as a mere term of respect, equivalent to Sir, but as it is employed by the LXX. as the common substitute of Jehovah, or rather as the translation ol W», in the sense of supreme Lord and possessor, so it is m the New Testament applied in the same sense to Christ. He is our Supreme Lord and possessor. We belong to him, and his authority over us is absolute, extending to the heart and con science as well as to the outward conduct; and to him every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that he is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. He, then, who in this exalted sense is our Lord, is, as to his human nature, the Son of David, and as to his Divine nature, the Son of God.

VERSE 5. Through whom we have received grace and apostleship. As it was of the utmost importance that Paul's authority as an apostle should be acknowledged in the Church, he here repeats the assertion that he received his office immediately from Jesus Christ, whose exalted character as the Son of God and our supreme Lord he had just declared. Though oi ou properly moans through whom, by whose instrumentality, the preposition must here be taken in a more general sense as indi cating the source from whom. Comp. Gal. i. 1, oca fisou xaTpoz. Rom. xi. 36, 1 Cor. i. 9. The words ydow xal a-w-ofyv may either be taken together and rendered the favour of the apostleship, or each word may be taken separately. Then %df>iz refers to the kindness of God manifested to the apostle in his conversion and vocation. ' Through whom we received grace, favour in general, and specially, the apostleship.'

Unto the obedience of faith. These words express the object of the apostleship; xiffTecoz is either the genitive of apposition, "obedience which consists in faith;" or it is the genitive of the source, "obedience which flows from faith;" or it is the geni tive of the object, "obedience to faith," i. e. to the gospel. In favour of the last interpretation reference may be made to 2 Cor. x. 5. y; u-axoy rorj Xocarou; 1 Pet. i. 22, -/j b-axoy r7^ dty&siaz, obedience to the truth. Sec Gal. i. 23, Acts vi. 7, Jude iii. for examples of the use of TJ.GTI^ in this objective sense. The subjective sense, however, of the word xiffTtz in the New Testa ment is so predominant that it is safest to retain it in this pas sage. The obedience of faith is that obedience which consists in faith, or of which faith is the controlling principle. The design of the apostleship was to bring all nations so to believe in Christ the Son of God that they should be entirely devoted to his ser vice. The sense is the same if Kia-tz he taken objectively, un derstood however not of the gospel, but of the inward principle of faith to which the nations were to be obedient. Among all nations. The apostles were not diocesans restricted in jurisdic tion to a particular territory. Their commission was general. It was to all nations. If these words are connected with we re ceived, they express directly the extent of the apostle's mission, 4 We have received a mission among all nations.' If, as is much more natural on acccount of their position, they are connected with the immediately preceding words, they express the same idea indirectly; his oilice was to promote obedience to the faith among all nations. Fur his name. That is for the sake of (b~e<t) his name or glory. These words are most naturally connected with the whole preceding verse, and express the final end of the apostle.-hip, viz. the honour of Christ. It was to promote the knowledge and glory of Christ that Paul had received his oilice and laboured to make the nations obedient to the gospel.

VERSK <J. Amnnij irhom are ye also. The apostle thus justi fies his addressing the Church at Home in his oilieial character. If the commission which he had received extended to all nations, lie was not transcending its limits in writing as an apostle to any church, though it had not been founded by his instrument ality, nor en jo veil his personal ministry. Called <>f Jesus Christ. This may mean. Those whom Christ has called. But as the -//.Y^::, or vocation of believers, is generally in the New Testament referred to God, the meaning probably is. The called who belong to Christ. Qui Dei benelicio estis Jesu Christi. Bt'za. Tiie word x/j^o^ is never in the epistles applied to one who is merely invited by the external call of the gospel. 01 xA'/jToc, the <•<///!?</, means the effectually called; those who are so called by God as to be made obedient to the call. Hence the xtfTOi are opposed to those who receive and disregard the outward call. Christ, though an offence to the Jews and Greeks, is declared to be (ro?c x/j^ol-) to the called the wisdom and power of God. 1 Cor. i. 24. Hence, too, x/^roi and ixhxToi are of nearly the same import; xa~a r.obdzGtv x/qTOi, Horn, yiii, 28; comp. lloin. ix. 11, 1 Cor. i. 26, 27. We accordingly find

Theophylact remarks that the word xtyrol is applied to Chris tians, since they are drawn by grace, and do not come of them selves. God, as it were, anticipates them. The same remark may be made of most of the other terms by which believers are designated. They all more or less distinctly bring into view the idea of the agency of God in making them to differ from others. They are called ixtexroi dzorJ. Rom. viii. 33, Col. iii. 12, 1 Tim. i. 1; or more fully, ixtex?ol xara xpofycoatv &sot, 1 Pet. i. 2; •ftftaaiJLsvot, sanctified, which includes the idea of separa tion, 1 Cor. i. 1, Jude i. 1, 7tpoopeff&£vre<; xo.ra xpbfrzaw rorj •#£oD, Eph. i. 11, ffcoZo/jLwo:, I Cor. i. 18, 2 Cor. ii. 15, reraffjisvot ere £tortv aitovcov, Acts xiii. 48.

VERSE 7. To all who are in Rome. These words are, in sense, connected with the first verse, "Paul, the servant of Jesus Christ, to all who are in Rome." Beloved of God. This is the great distinction and blessedness of believers, they are the beloved of God. They are not so called simply because, as was the case with the ancient Israelites, they are selected from the rest of the world, and made the recipients of peculiar external favours; but because they are the objects of that great love wherewith he hath loved those whom, when they were dead in sins, he hath quickened together with Christ, Eph. ii. 4, 5. They are the elect of God, holy and beloved, Col. iii. 12; they are brethren beloved of the Lord, 2 Thcss. ii. 13. Called to be saints. The former of these words stands in the same relation to the latter that xtyTO? docs to d-o0ro/oc in ver. 1, called to be in apostle, called to be saints. It is one of those designations peculiar to the true people of God, and expresses at once their vocation, and that to which they are called, viz. holiness. The word (if toz, in accordance with the meaning of Ehnp in the Old Testament, signifies clean, pure morally, consecrated, and espe cially as applied to God, hob/, worthy of reverence. The people of Israel, their land, their temple, &c., are called holy, as separated and devoted to God. The term a;-'0' as applied to the people of God under the new dispensation, includes this idea. They are saints, because they are a community separated from th-e world and consecrated to God. But agreeably to the nature of the Christian dispensation, this separation is not merely external; believers are assumed to be really separated from sin, that is, clean, pure. Again, as the impurity of sin is, according to Scripture, twofold, its pollution, and guilt or just liability to punishment, so the words xattu.'.o^, xatiaoi^v, 6.f(d^s:i<J which all mean to cl<'<tuxi'. are used both to express the cleansing from guilt by expiation, and from pollution by the Holy Spirit. Sometimes the one and sometimes the other, and often both of these ideas are expressed by the words. See John xv. 2, lid), x. 2, for the use of xafracoco; Acts xv. 9, Epli. v. 20, Tit. ii. 14, ]Ieb. ix. 14, 22, 1 John i. 7, for the use of xad-api^aj; John xvii. 11*. Acts xxvi. 1'!. 1 Tim. iv. o, Ileb. ii. 11, x. 10, 14, 2(-», for tin1 use of ri;'.'tt*</;. Hence Christians arc called tLfiot) fffia.GfJ.ivQi, not only as those who are conse crated to God, but also as those who are cleansed both by expiation, and by the renewing of the Ifolv Ghost.

"Novam hie periodum incipio," says Dcza, "adscripto puncto post &('.()>.'" In this punctuation he is followed by Knapp, Lachmann, Fritzsche, and many others. The senst,1 then is, ".Paul, an apostle — to the saints in Home." And then follows the salutation, "Grace and peace to vou." That the words y/i-o:z tut stfrfy/j are in the nominative, and the introduction of utiiK show that a new sentence is here begun.

d rm-n. be to ifnu* <unl p<'a<-<>. \a<>^ is kindness, and espe cially undeserved kindness, and therefore it is so often used to express the unmerited goodness of God in the salvation of sin ners. Very frequently it is used metonymically for the effect of kindness, that is, for a gift or favour. Anything, therefore, bestowed on the undeserving may be called yji.<t'.c. In this sense Paul calls his apostleship yfvn~, Horn. xii. -5, Kph. iii. 2, 8; and all the blessings conferred on sinners through Jesus Christ, are graces, or gifts. It is in this sense repentance, faith, love, and hope are graces. And especially the influence of the Holy Spirit in the heart, in connection with the gift of the Son, the greatest of God's free gifts to men, is with peculiar propriety called ydp'.z, cr grace. Such is its meaning in 1 Cor. xv. 10, 2 Cor. viii. 1, Rom. xii. G, Gal. i. 15, and in many other pas sages. In the text, it is to be taken in the comprehensive se in which it is used in the apostolic benediction, for the favour and love of God and Christ. The word ecftfvy, which is so often united with ^a/A'C in the formulas of salutation, is used in the wide sense of the Hebrew word tjiid, well-being, prosperity, every kind of good. Grace and peace therefore include everything that we can desire or need, the favour of God, arid all the blessings that favour secures. "Nihil prius optandum," says Calvin, " quuin ut Deurn propitium habcamus; quod designatur per gratiam. Dcinde, ut ab eo prosperitas et successus omnium rerum fluat, qui significatur Pacis vocabulo."

From God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. This association of the Father and Christ as equally the object of prayer, and the source of spiritual blessings, is a conclusive proof that Paul regarded Christ as truly God. God is called our Father, not merely as the author of our existence, and the source of every blessing, but especially as reconciled towards us through Jesus Christ. The term expresses the peculiai relation in which he stands to those who are his sons, whc have the spirit of adoption, and are the heirs or recipients of the heavenly inheritance. Jesus Christ is our Lord, as our supreme Ruler, under whose care and protection wTe are placed, and through whose ministration all good is actually bestowed.

YE USE 8. From this verse to the end of the 17th, we have the general introduction to the epistle. It has the usual characteristics of the introductory portions of the apostle's letters. It is commendatory. It breathes the spirit of love towards his brethren, and of gratitude and devotion towards God; and it introduces the reader in the most natural and appropriate manner to the great doctrines which he means to exhibit. First, I thank my God. The words ~/>wroy jdv imply an enumeration, which however is not carried out. Comp. 1 Cor. xi. 18, 2 Cor. xii. 12, and other cases in which the apostle begins a construction which he does not continue. My God, that is, the God to whom I belong, whom I serve, and who stands to me in the relation of God, as father, friend, and source of all good. "I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people," is the most comprehensive of all pro mises. Through Jesus Christ, are not to be connected with the immediately preceding words, 'My God, through Jesus Christ;' but with etyaofff-co, 'I thank God, through Jesus Christ.' This form of expression supposes the mediation of Christ, by whom alone we have access to the Father, and for whose sake alone either our prayers or praises are accepted. See Roni. vii. 25, Eph. v. 20, "Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." And Col. iii. 17, "Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him." Hob. xiii. 15, "By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God." All this is in accordance with the command of Christ, John xiv. 13, and xvi. 23, 24, "Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive." Such then being the clear doctrine of the Bible, that in all our approaches to God in prayer or praise, we must come in the name of Christ, that is, in him, referring to him as the ground of our acceptance, there is no need of the various forced interpretations of the words in the text, which have been given by those who arc unwilling to admit the idea of such mediation on the part of Christ. For you all. Several manuscripts have ~im instead of uxso, which is probably a Correction. The sense is the same. The special ground of the apostle's thankfulness is expressed in the following clause: That your faith is spoken of throughout the u'hole world. Their faith was of such a character as to excite general atten tion and remark. Xot only the fact that the Romans believed, 'out that their faith was of such a character as to be everywhere spoken of, was recognized by the apostle as cause of gratitude to God. God therefore is the giver of faith.

VERSE 0. In confirmation of his declaration of gratitude for their conversion, and for the eminence of their faith, Paul appears to his constant remembrance of them in his prayers. For Grod is my witness. This reverend appeal to God as the searcher of hearts, is not uncommon in the apostle's writings. 2 Cor. i. 23, Gal. i. 20, Philip, i. 8. It is an act of worship, a devout recognition of God's omnipresence and omniscience. Whom I serve. The word karpzuu) is in the New Testament always used of religious service, either as rendered to God or to creatures — 'Who worship and serve the creature more than the Creator,' chap. i. 25. This service may consist either in worship, or in the performance of external duties of a religious nature. The service of which Paul here speaks is characterized in the following clause; iti my spirit. This is opposed at once to an insincere, and to a mere external service. In the gospel of his Son. That is, it was a service rendered in preaching the gospel. The priests served, $AdTf>£uaau, when performing the duties of their office; and Paul served in performing the duties of an apostle. The gospel of his Son, may mean either the gospel concerning his Son, or which his Son himself taught. The former, perhaps, is more in accordance with the use of this and similar phrases, as, i gospel of the kingdom/ 'gospel of the grace of God,' &c. That I constantly make mention of you. It is plain, from the occurrence of the word ozo/uvoz in the next verse, and from the use of this expression in other places, Philip, i. 3, 1 Thess. i. 2, that Paul here refers to his remem bering the Roman Christians in his prayers, and not to his bearing them in his mind, or talking about them. The particle cb- may be connected with ddtahixnoz, how uninterruptedly; or with the clause, ' God is my witness that,' &c. Comp. Acts x. 28, 1 Thcss. ii. 10.

VERSE 10. I make mention of you, always in my prayers praying (ic ~co-) if possibly, if it may be, expressing the sub mission to the will of God with which the apostle urged his request, yjoy ~o~s, now at last, as though he had long looked forward with desire to what there was now a prospect of his seeing accomplished. I may be so happy, by the will of God, to come to you. Euodouv is, to lead in the right way, to pros per one's journey, Gen. xxiv. 48, and figuratively, to prosper, 1 Cor. xvi. 2, 8 John 2. In the passive voice, it is, to be prospered, successful, favoured. In the present case, as Paul had neither commenced his journey, nor formed any immediate purpose to undertake it, s-ee chap. xv. 25 — 29, his prayer was not that his journey might be prosperous, but that he might be permitted to undertake it; that his circumstances should be so favourably ordered that he might be able to execute his long cherished purpose of visiting Home. Knowing, however, that all things are ordered of God, and feeling that his own wishes should be subordinated to the Divine will, he adds, Itij the will of G-od; which is equivalent to, If it be the will of God. 'Praying continually, that, if it be the will of God, I may be prospered to come unto you.'

VERSE 11. Why the apostle was anxious to visit Rome, he states in this verse. lie desired to see them, not merely for his own gratification, but that he might confer some spiritual gift upon them, which would tend to strengthen their faith. For 1 lomj to see you, that 1 maif impart (JJLZTO.OCO xl/a.n- with you) some spiritual <jift. l>y spiritual gift is not to be under stood a gift pertaining to the soul in distinction from the body, but one derived from the Spirit. The gifts of which the Holy {Spirit is the author, include not only those miraculous endow ments of which such frequent mention is made in the Epistle to the Corinthians, and the ordinary gifts of teaching, exhorta tion, and prophesying, 1 Cor. xii., but also those graces which are the fruits of the Spirit. The extraordinary gifts were communicated by the imposition of the apostles' hands, Acts viii. IT, xix. 6, and therefore abounded in churches founded by the apostles, 1 Cor. i. T, Gal. iii. 5. As the church at Rome was not of this number, it has been supposed that Paul was desirous of conferring on the Roman Christians some of those miraculous powers by which the gospel was in other places attended and confirmed. The following verses, however, are in favour of giving the phrase here a wider signification. Any increase of knowledge, of grace, or of power, was a ydpiapa r^?J<w.TMov in the sense here intended. In order that ye may be strengthened. This includes not only an increase of con fidence in their belief of the gospel, but an increase of strength in their religious feelings, and in their purpose and power of obedience. Comp. 1 Thess. iii. "2: I sent Timothy — uto estab lish you, and to comfort you concerning your faith." And 2 Thess. ii. 17, "Now our Lord Jesus Christ comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.'* And the apostle prays that the Ephesians might be strengthened is to the inner man.

"VERSE 12. That is, that I may be comforted amcng you. This is obviously intended to be an explanation or correction of what precedes. He had desired to see them, in order that he might do them good; but this was not his whole object, ho hoped to receive benefit himself. As to the grammatical construction, the infinitive aop.xapazk/j&T'jVat may depend on arqprfcdfjiHU. The sense would then be, ' That you may be strengthened, that I may be comforted.' Or the one infinitive is coordinate with the other; then both depend on the iva UZTV.OCO of ver. 10, ' That I may impart some spiritual gift to you, in order that you may be strengthened; that is, that I may be comforted together with you.' This seems the most natural construction; yet as Paul expected to be refreshed by their faith, and not by his giving them spiritual gifts, the sense seems to require that G^ii.-o.t>(j:/J:fli)-7l^(u should depend on the first words of ver. 10, ' I desire to see you, that I may impart (iva tJtSTaoa)} some spiritual gift to you; that is, that I may be comforted (GO/j.-apax/^&YjVat),' &c. It is not a valid objection to this interpretation, that it supposes a change of the construc tion from the subjunctive to the infinitive. A similar change occurs (probably) in ch. ix. 22, 23; and much greater irregu larities are not unfrequent in the New Testament.

The word xaoaxaAsto is used in such various senses, that it is not easy to determine what precise meaning should be attached to it here. It signifies to call near, to invite, Acts xxviii. 20, to call upon, and more generally to address, cither for instruc tion, admonition, exhortation, confirmation, or consolation. Our translators and the majority of commentators choose the last mentioned sense, and render crJ!JL~ao(t:/jjjdy^(u (i/Jtz) that I may be comforted. This is probably too narrow. The word expresses all that excitement and strengthening of faith and pious feeling, as well as consolation, which is wont to ilow from the communion of saints. This appears from the context, and especially from the following clause, d>a TY^ lu d)J:ijXocz Trr'tfrcw,, u<w)u rs '/ju l/io7), through our mutual faith, as well yours as mine. The faith of the llomans would not only com fort, but strengthen the apostle; and his faith could not fail to produce a like effect on them. ll*ntoi> TS xat kuorj are the explanation of the preceding iv d/x^/o^ and should therefore be in the dative. Fritsche refers to Luke i. 55, for a similar case of variation in the construction.

VERSE 13. I would not have you ignorant., brethren; a mode of expression which the apostle often adopts, when he would assure his readers of anything, or call their attention to it par ticularly. That oftentimes 1 purposed to come unto you. In chap. xv. 23, he states that he had cherished this purpose for many years. And ivas hindered until now. Our version ren ders xai adversatively but. This is objected to as unnecessary, especially as xai often introduces a parenthesis; and such is this clause, because the following?i/« must depend on Tzpos&sfJtijV of the preceding clause. As in the fifteenth chapter the apos tle says, that having no more place in the countries around Greece, lie was ready to visit Rome, it is probable that the hindering to which he here refers, was the incessant calls for apostolic labour, which left no time at his command. As, how ever, his course seems to have been under the guidance of a special providence, Acts xvi. 6, 7, 9, it may be that the Spirit who had forbidden his preaching in Asia, had hitherto forbidden his visiting Homo. That I way have no we fruit among you, as among other gentiles. Kan-ov ^J^ i> flt l>"r<> j"''>fif, or advati* tagc. See chap. vi. 21, 22. The profit, however, which Paul desired, was the fruit of his ministry, the conversion or edifica tion of those to whom he preached.

VKRSK 14. Jlvth to (! r»'<'kx nn<l harh<ii'i<in*. t<> tin1 //v'.sv and to the utiwim', I am debtor. That is, I am under obligation (to preach) to all classes of men. His commission was a general one, confined to no one nation, and to no particular class. Greeks and barbarians, mean all nations; wise and unwise, mean all classes. Bdofiapoz means properly a foreigner, 0110 of another language, 1 Cor. xiv. 11. Greeks and barbarians, therefore, is equivalent to Greeks and not Greeks, all nations. As the Greeks however excelled other nations in civilization, the word came to signify rude, uncultivated; though even by later writers it is often used in its original sense, and not as a term of reproach. The apostle distinguishes men first as nations, Greeks and not Greeks, and secondly as to culture, wise and unwise. The Romans, whose city was called "an epitome cf the world," belonged exclusively neither to the one class nor to the other. Some were wise and some unwise, some Greeks and some barbarians.

VERSE 15. And so, or Jtence. That is, since I am bound to all men, Greeks and barbarians, I am ready to preach to you, who are at Rome. The clause, TO XO.T S/JLS npoftu/jLOu, admits of different interpretations. According to the English version, TO xaT £/is must be taken together; 7ip6&up.ov is taken as a sub stantive, and made the nominative to iari. Hence, as much as is in me, (or, as far as I am concerned,) there is a readiness, i. c. I am ready. Thus Calvin, "Itaque, quantum in me est, paratus sum." This gives a good sense, and is specially suited to the context, as it renders prominent Paul's dependence and submission, lie did not direct his own steps. As far as he was concerned, he was willing to preach in Rome; but whether he should do so or not, rested not with him, but with God. A second explanation makes TO XUT I/JLS the subject of the sen tence, and npo&uftov the predicate. 'What is in me is ready.' Tims Beza, " Quicquid in me situm est, id promptuin est." Or, as Beza also proposes, TO XU.T e/ts may be taken as a periphrase for k-fd), and the clause be translated, "Promptus sum ego." But it is denied that such a periphrase for the personal pronoun ever occurs; TO. bjjisTspa for 6//£?c, and r« I fid for spw, to which Beza refers, are not parallel. The third explanation, refers TO to TCpb&OfJLOV) and makes ZV.T S/JLS equal to e//oD, ' My readiness, or desire is.' Comp. Eph. i. 15, TT^ xatf uiiil^ KiffTW, your faith; Acts xvii. 28. TCOV xatf u(j.H^ -o^Ttou, xviii. lo, vofjLou TOU y.u.<y d/jtas. To preach the gospel. The verb £i)ai"[£M(jaad-ac is commonly followed by some word or phrase expressing the subject of the message — kingdom of God, go-spel, word of God, Christ. In writing to Christians, who knew what the glad tidings were, the apostles often, as in the present case, use the word absolutely so that the word by itself means, to preach the gospel, &c. See ch. xv. 20, Acts xiv. 7, Gal. iv. 13.

VERSE 16. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ.* This he assigns as the reason why he was ready to preach even

* The words rw Xprrsy are omitted in the MSS. A. B. C. D. E. G. 17. G7. in many of the versions and Fathers, and are rejected by Mill, Bengel, Griesbach, Laehmann, Tischendorf, and others. They are found in the Complutensian text and are defended by Wetstein and Matthaei.

at Rome. To the wise of this world the gospel was foolishness, 1 Cor. i. 23, yet Paul was not ashamed of it, but was ready among the wise and unwise to preach Christ and him crucified. The reason of this regard for the gospel is stated in the follow ing clause: For it is the power of God unto salvation. By dwafJLtz 0zo~j, some understand great power, in accordance with an assumed Hebrew idiom, agreeably to which 'mountains of God' mean great mountains, 'wind of God' great wind, 4 zeal of God' great zeal, &c. But the existence of such an idiom in the Hebrew is very doubtful, and its application to this passage is unnatural and unnecessary. Others make 6sorj a mere quali fying genitive, 'power of God,' meaning k divinely powerful.' Beza's explanation is, "Org;uion Dei vere potens et cfficax." The gospel is then declared to be that through which God exer cises his power. Most commonly 6zorj is taken as the "-euitivo of the Author, and power of God is made to mean power derived from God. There are two things then asserted of the gospel, first that it is powerful, and secondly that it is from God. Comp. 1 Cor. i. 18, 24. The main idea, however, is that expressed by Be/:i, The gospel is that in which God works, which he renders efficacious — srV ffcoTypiav, unto wdv<iti<»i. That is, it is eilicacious to save. The nature of the salvation here intended is to be learned from the nature of the gospel. It is deliverance from sin and its punishment, and admission into eternal life and blessedness. 'This is what no means of man's devising, no efforts of human wisdom or human power could effect for any human bring. The gospel effects it ~a^ri TOJ rr.'tfrrWtv, for every one that believes. Emphasis must be laid on both the members of this clause. The gospel is thus efficacious to every one, without distinction between Jew and gentile, Greek or bar barian, -wise or unwise; and it is efficacious to every one that believes, not to every one who is circumcised, or baptized, or who obeys the law, but to every one who believes, that is, who receives and confides in Jesus Christ as he is offered in the gospel. We have here the two great doctrines set forth in this epistle. First, salvation is by faith; and secondly, it is univer sally applicable, to the Greek as well as to the Jew. The faith of which the apostle here speaks includes a firm persuasion of the truth, and a reliance or trust on the object of faith.

Sometimes the one, sometimes the other cf these ideas is expressed by the word, and very often both are united. The meaning of the term is not to be determined so much by philo sophical analysis as by scriptural usage. For the question is not what is the abstract nature of the act of believing, philoso phically considered, but what act or state of mind is expressed by the words xeaTS'Jsev and xiaTtz in the various constructions in which they occur. It is rare indeed that the state of mind expressed by any word is so simple as not to admit of being resolved into various elements. The exercise expressed by the word love, for example, includes the perception of agreeable qualities in its object, a judgment of the mind as to their nature, a delight in them, and a desire for their enjoyment. And these differ specifically in their nature, according to the nature of the thing loved. It is not to any one of these elements of the complex affection that the word love is applied, but to the state of mind as a whole. So also with the word faith, the exercise which it expresses includes a perception of its object and its qualities, that is, it includes knowledge; secondly, an assent of the mind to the truth of the thing believed, and very often a reliance or trust on the object of faith. Assent is therefore but one of the elements of saving faith, that is, it is but one of the constituents of that state of mind which, in a multitude of cases, is in the Bible expressed by the word. And as the great object of interest to Christians is not a philosophical definition of a word, but a knowledge of the sense in which it is used in the word of God, we must recur to the usage of the Scriptures themselves to determine what chac faith is which is connected with salvation.

There is no doubt that xeff-ce'jseis is often used to express mere assent. It means — to receive as true, to be persuaded of the truth of anything. Hence xiartz is persuasion of the truth. When -t(JT='j=>v has this simple meaning, it is commonly fol lowed by the accusative, as in 1 Cor. xi. 18, John xi. 26; or by the dative, Mark xvi. 13, owls Ixsluo^ l-'.(J7E>j<7au, John v. 40; or by orr, Mark xi. 23, Rom. x. 9. Yet in these cases the word often expresses confidence or trust, as well as assent; -lOTZ'jzw Qsw is in many connections, to confide in God; aa Acts xxvii. 25, xcGTeuco yap TOJ 6zw OTC O'JTCOZ Za~ai.

The substantive rr/tfr.'C also in various constructions signifies reliance, or trust; thus when followed by etz, as in Acts xx. 21, TJ.O-LV 77 > £/c rov K'jinm* YJtwWi xxiv. 24, xxvi. 18; by i~r, with the accusative, Ileb. vi. 1; by ~/>oc, as 1 Thcss. i. S, -rrrr.'C 6/^wv xy roor ro> f-)-nv; by cV, Rom. iii. 2o, ^« r/^c rs.a-ZMZ, ^-> T(u a'J~orj atftv-t, comp. Gal. iii. 26, 1 Tim. iii. 13, -XT-Z> nt ^ \<na~w, 2 Tim. iii. 1-3; or by the genitive, as in Horn. iii. 22, 26, Gal. ii. 10, iii. 22, and often. That faith, therefore, which is connected with salvation, includes knowledge, that is, a percep tion of the truth and its qualities; assent, or the persuasion of the truth of the object of faith; and trust, or reliance. The exercise, or state of mind expressed by the word faith, as used in the Scriptures, is not mere assent, or mere trust, it is the intelligent perception, reception, and reliance on the truth, as revealed in the gospel.

To tin' Jew ///•*/, <iii<l alxo fo tJi>> G/'a'Jc. To render -WOTOU (first,) here r.s^vvW///, would make the apostle teach that thf gospel was peculiarly adapted to the Jews, or specially designed for them. Rut he frequently asserts that this is not the case, chap. iii. i\ 22, 20, x. 12. Upcorov, therefore, must have refer ence to time, ' To the Jew in the first instance, and then to the Greek.' Salvation, as our Saviour said to the woman of Samaria, is of the Jews. Of them the Messiah came, to them the gospel was first preached, and by them preached to the Gentiles. The apostle often, as in the present instance, says Jews and Greeks, for Jews and Gentiles, because the Greeks were the Gentiles with whom, at that period, the Jews were most familiar.

VEUSE 17, The reason why the gospel has the efficacy ascribed to it in the preceding verse, is not because of its pure morality, or because it reveals and confirms a future state of retribution, but because the righteousness of G-od is therein revealed. As this is one of those expressions which are rmployed to convey ideas peculiar to the gospel, its meaning is to be learned not merely from the signification of the words, but from parallel passages, and from the explanations given in the gospel itself of the whole subject to which it relates. That oc/juoa'jvfi cannot here be understood of a divine attribute, such as rectitude, justice, goodness, or veracity, is obvious, because it is a dtzaioauvq Ix xlarzcoz, a righteousness wldcli is Inj faith, i. e. attained by faith, of which the apostle speaks. Besides, it is elsewhere said to be without law, Rom. iii. 21, to be u gift, v. 17, not to be our own, x. 3, to be from God, Philip, iii. 9. These and similar forms of expression are inconsistent with the assumption that the apostle is speaking of a divine attribute. The righteousness of God, therefore, must mean either the righteousness of which God is the author, or which he approves. Luther, Calvin, and many others, prefer the latter. "Die Gerechtigkeit die vor Gott gilt," is Luther's version. Calvin says, "Justitiam Dei accipio, quae apud Dei tribunal approbatur." Beza, Reiche, De Wette, RUckcrt, and others, prefer the latter. These ideas are not incompatible. This righteousness is at once a otxaicxr'^ fj Ix $£oD, Philip, iii. 9; and a dexcuoff&vy ~a(>a rw (9ctw, Rom. ii. 13, iii. 20, Gal. iii. 11. The gospel reveals a righteousness, which God gives, and which he approves; it is a righteousness, "qua quisquis donatus e.-t, sistitur coram Deo, sanctus, inculpatus, et nullius labis possit postulari." Beza.

This interpretation is confirmed by all that the Scriptures teach respecting the manner of our justification before God. The Bible represents God in the character of a moral governor or judge. Man is placed under a law which is the rule of his duty, and the standard by which he is to be judged. This law may be variously revealed, but it is ever substantially the same, having the same precepts, the same sanction, and the same promises. Those who comply with the demands of this law are oixacot, righteous; those who break the law are docxot, unrighteous; to pronounce one righteous is 3.'x#ro3v, to justify; t the righteousness itself, or integrity which the law demands is I dr/.aco(T'Ji>'/j. Those who are righteous, or who have the right-j eousness which the law requires, or who are justified, have a» title to the favour of God.

Now, nothing is more clearly taught in the Scriptures than that no man in himself is righteous in the sight of God. " There is none righteous, no not one; for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." It is no less clearly taught that no man can make himself righteous; that is, he cannot attain the righteousness which the law demands, and which is necessary to his acceptance with God. The reason is that the law demands perfect ohedience, which no one has rendered or can render. It is hence plain that by the works of the law no flesh can he justified before God. Rom. iii. 12<), Gal. ii. 10; oc/j >.',() rf'jv^ is not Ix wtwjj Gal. iii. 21, or U>JL youou, ii. 21, or l~ soj'wv, ii. 10. Men are not justified tma dtxaeoff'JVfl by their own righteousness. Rom. x. 3. And yet righteous ness is absolutely necessary to our justification and salvation. Such a righteousness the gospel reveals; a righteousness which is %(t><>iz w/wj, without the law; which is not of works; a oc/.tLiocs'jvr, ~i(7~zioz or I/. rrrVirc^c, u'hi<'h is l»j fctitli; a rightousness which is not our own, Philip, iii. (J; which is the gift of God, Rom. v. 17; which is 1% H^rj fmm (J}»d\ which is imputed /c'jo.'c e,"/'"^ without works. Christ is our righteous ness, 1 Cor. i. oU, or we are righteous before God in him. 2 Cor. v. 21.

From this contrast between a righteousness which is our own, which is of works, and that which is not our own, which is of God, from God, the gift of God, it is plain that the dwuoaw-f] Oiorj of which the apostle here speaks, is that dtx(uo<j'ji>rj by which we arc made dixwoe ~aoa TW t)z(n; it is a righteousness which he gives and which he approves. This is the interpretation which is given substantially by all the modern commentators of note, as Tholuck, Reiche, Fritzsche, Ruckert, Koellner, De Wette, &c., however much they may differ as to other points. uAlle Erkliirungen," says De Wette, "welche das Moment der Zurechnung iibersehen, und das thun besonders die katholischeri, auch die des Grotius, sind falsch."

That is, "All interpretations which overlook the idea of impu tation, as is done in the explanations given by the Romanists, and also in that of Grotius, are false."

The nature of this righteousness, it is one great des.ign of this epistle, and of the whole gospel to unfold. This, there fore is not the place to enter fully into the examination of that point; it will present itself at every step of our progress. It is sufficient here to specify the three general views of the nature of that righteousness by which men are justified before God. The first may be called the Pelagian, according to which the apostle teaches that righteousness cannot be attained by obedience to the ritual law of the Jews, but consists in works morally good. The second view is that of the Roman ists, who teach that the works meant to be excluded from our justification are legal works; works done without grace and before regeneration; but the righteousness which makes us just before God, is that inherent righteousness, or spiritual excel lence which is obtained by the aid of divine grace. The third view, which is the common doctrine of Protestant churches is, that the righteousness for which we are justified is neither any thing done by us nor wrought in us, but something done for us arid imputed to us. It is the work of Christ, what lie did and suffered to satisfy the demands of the law. Hence not merely external or ceremonial works are excluded as the ground of justification; but works of righteousness, all works of what ever kind or degree of excellence. Hence this righteousness is not our own. It is nothing that wre have either wrought ourselves, or that inheres in us. Hence Christ is said to be our righteousness; and we are said to be justified by his blood, his death, his obedience; WTC are righteous in him, and are justified by him or in his name, or for his sake. The right eousness of God, therefore, which the gospel reveals, and by which we are constituted righteous, is the perfect righteous ness of Christ which completely meets and answers all the demands of that law to which all men are subject, and which | all have broken.

This righteousness is said in the text to be of faith. It is obvious that the words Ix -lars.^ are not to be connected with sTac, They must be connected either directly or