Commentary on Romans; Systematic Theology

indirectly with d'y.aioa'j^. It is either d-oxaA'j-TiTa!, righteousness by faith is revealed; or, OC faoxaA'j-TeTac Ix -'.oieeo- ouaa, righteousness is revealed, being of faith, i. e. which is by faith. Not an excellence of which faith is the germinating principle, or which consists in faith, because this is inconsistent with all those representations which show that this righteousness is not subjective.

The meaning of the words el- x*.a-w in the formula ex ni<JTeco- el- ~><TTtu, from faith to faith, is very doubtful. They must be explained in a manner consistent with their connection with oc,:!L'.o(j''jvrr It is a righteousness which is of faith to faith. Now it cannot bo said that our justification depends on our believing first the Old Testament, and then the New, which is the interpretation of Theodoret — osl ~(<u> ~t(j-zrj<r<u rul^ npoyy- TOIZ-, xu'i oe sxziws el- rr^ rov euaffeMou ~f.(j-& xodrtfrftrjvac; nor does it seem to suit this connection to make the phrase in question express a progress from a weak or imperfect faith to that which is more perfect. This however is a very gene rally received interpretation. Calvin says, " Qiium initio gustamus evaugelium, lactam quidcni et exporrectam nobis ccrnimus Dei frontem, sed eminus; quo magis augeseit pietatis eruditio, velut propiore accessu clarius ac magis familiariter Dei gratiam perspicimus." The sense is however perfectly clear and irood, if the phrase is explained to mean, faith alone. As "death unto death'' and "life unto life" tire intensive, so "faith unto faith" may mean, entirely of faith. Our justi fication is by faith alone; works form no part of that right eousness in which we can stand before the tribunal of God. "Dicit," says Px-r.gcl, k> (idem meram; namque justitia ex fide subsistit in fide, sine operibus..... Fides, intuit Paulus, manet fides; fides est prora ct puppis, apud Judicos et Gentiles, etiam apud Paulum, us(lue ad ipsam cjus consummationem." Most of the modern commentators regard el- in the words e/c xiffw, as indicating the terminus. Righteousness is from faith and unto faith, comes to it. This makes riaw here virtually equivalent to r^a'e'jo^ra-, as in chap. iii. 22, the daatoffwy 0eo~j is said to be e^ -d^a^ TO-J— xeffTMovraz. Righteousness then is by faith and unto faith, i. e. is granted unto or bestowed upon believers.

This doctrine of the apostle, that the righteousness which is unto life is to be obtained by faith, he confirms by a reference to Hab. ii. 4, where it is said, 6 os olxaioz ex TiiaTetoz, Cr/aerat* lie that is righteous by faith, shall live; or, the righteous shall live by faith. The connection of ex xcareaH; with oixcuoz is certainly best suited to the apostle's object, which is to show that righteousness is by faith; but in either construction the sense is substantially the same. Salvation is by faith. In the Hebrew also, either construction is 'allowable, as the words are "The righteous in his faith shall live." The Masoretic accen tuation however connects, as Paul does, the first two words together, ' The righteous in his faith, shall live.' Shall livey shall attain that life which Christ gives, which is spiritual, blessed, and everlasting; comp. chap. v. 17, viii. 13, x. 3. This passage is cited in confirmation of the apostle's own doctrine, and is peculiarly pertinent as it shows that under the old dis pensation as well as under the new, the favour of God was to be secured by faith.

1. The apostolic office, except as to what was peculiar and extraordinary, being essentially the same with the ministerial office in general, Paul teaches, 1. That ministers are the servants of Christ, deriving their authority from him, and not from the people; 2. That their calling is to preach the gospel, to which all other avocations must be made subordinate; 3. That the object of their appointment is to bring men to the obedience of faith; 4. That their field is all nations; 5. That the design of all is to honour Christ; it is for his name, vs. 1 — 5.

2. The gospel is contained in its rudiments in the Old Testament. It is the soul of the old dispensation, ver. 2.

3. Christ is the Alr^ha and Omega of the gospel. In stating the substance of the gospel, Paul says, i It concerns Jesus Christ,' ver. 3.

4. Christ is at once God and man; the son of David and the Son of God, vs. 3, 4.

5. Christ is called the Son of God in reference to his Divine nature, and on account of the relation in which, as God, he stands to the Father. The name, therefore, is expressive of his Divine character, vs. 3, 4.

6. He is the proper object of prayer, and the source of spiritual blessings, ver. 7.

7. He is the Mediator through whom our prayers and thanksgiving must be presented to God, ver. 8.

8. God is the source of all spiritual good; is to be wor shipped in spirit, and agreeably to the gospel; and his pro vidence is to be recognized in reference to the most ordinary afciirs of life, vs. 8—10.

9. Ministers are not a class of men exalted above the people, and independent of them for spiritual benefits, but are bound to seek, as well as to impart good, in all their intercourse with those to whom they are sent, vs. 11, 12.

10. Ministers are bound to preach the gospel to all men, rich as well as' poor, wise as well as unwise; for it is equally adapted to the wants of all, vs. 14, 15.

11. The salvation of men, including the pardon of their sins arid the moral renovation of their hearts, can be effected by the gospel alone. The wisdom of men, during four thousand years previous to the advent of Christ, failed to discover any ade quate means for the attainment of either of these objects; and tlu.se who, since the advent, have neglected the gospel, have been equally unsuccessful, ver. 16, &c.

12. The power of the gospel lies not in its pure theism, or perfect moral code, but in the Cuoss, in the doctrine of justifi cation by faith in a crucified Redeemer, ver. 17, &c.

1. Ministers should remember that they are "separated unto the gospel," and that any occupation which, by its demands upon their attention, or from its influence on their character or feelings, interferes with their devotion to this object, is for them wrong, ver. 1.

2. If Jesus Christ is the great subject of the gospel, it is evident that we cannot have right views of the one, without having correct opinions respecting the other. What think ye of Christ? cannot be a minor question. To be Christians, we must recognize him as the Messiah, or son of David; and as

Divine, or the Son of God; we must be able to pray to him, to look for blessings from him, and recognize him as the Mediator between God and man, vs. 1 — 8.

8. Christians should remember that they are saints; that is, persons separated from the world and consecrated to God. They therefore cannot serve themselves or the world, without a dereliction of their character. They are saints, because called and made such of God. To all such, grace and peace are secured by the mediation of Christ, and the promise of God,

4. In presenting truth, everything consistent with fidelity should be done to conciliate the confidence and kind feelings of those to whom it is addressed; and everything avoided, which tends to excite prejudice against the speaker or his message. Who more faithful than Paul? Yet who more anxious to avoid offence? Who more solicitous to present the truth, not in its most irritating form, but in the manner best adapted to gain for it access to the unruffled minds of his readers? vs. 8 — 14.

5. As all virtues, according to the Christian system, are graces (gifts,) they afford matter for thanksgiving, but never for self-complacency, ver. 8.

6. The intercourse of Christians should be desired, and made to result in edification, by their mutual faith, ver. 12.

7. He who rejects the doctrine of justification by faith, rejects the gospel. His whole method of salvation, and system of religion, must be different from those of the apostles, ver. 17.

8. Whether we be wise or unwise, moral or immoral, in the sight of men, orthodox or heterodox in our opinions, unless we are believers, unless we cordially receive "the righteousness which is of God," as the ground of acceptance, we have no part or lot in the salvation of the gospel, ver. 17.

The apostle having stated that the only righteousness avail able in the sight of God is that which is obtained by faith, proceeds to p~ove that such is the case. This proof required that he should, in the first instance, demonstrate that the righteousness which is of the law, or of works, was insufficient for the justification of a sinner. This he does, first in referrence to the Gentiles, chap. i. 18 — 32; and then in relation to the Jews, chap, ii., iii. 1 — 20. The residue of this chapter then is designed to prove that the Gentiles are justly exposed to condemnation. The apostle thus argues: God is just; his displeasure against sin (which is its punishment) is clearly revealed, vcr. 18. This principle is assumed by the apostle, as the foundation of his whole argument. If this be granted, it follows that all who are chargeable with either impiety or immorality are exposed to the wrath of God, and cannot claim his favour on the ground of their own character or conduct. That the Gentiles are justly chargeable with both impiety and immorality, he thus proves. They have ever enjoyed such a revelation of the divine character as to render them inexcusa ble, vs. 10, 20. Notwithstanding this opportunity of knowing God, they neither worshipped nor served him, but gave thcm- Belves up to all forms of idolatry. This is the height of impiety, vs. 21 — 23. In consequence of this desertion of God, he gave them up to the evil of their own hearts, so that they sank into all manner of debasing crimes. The evidences of this corruption of morals were so painfully obvious, that Paul merely appeals to the knowledge which all his readers possessed of the fact, vs. 24 — 31. These various crimes they do not commit ignorantly; they are aware of their ill-desert; and yet they not only commit them themselves, but encourage others in the same course, v. 32.

The inference from the established sinfulness of the Gentile world, Paul does not draw until he has substantiated the same charge against the Jews, lie then says, since all are sinners before God, no flesh can be justified by the works of the law, chap. iii. 20.

VERSE 18. *A7zo'/a):j~Ts.Tv.c fv.p OO^TJ 0s.oi> CLTZ o'joo.vo'j. For the wrath cf Gad is revealed from heaven. The apostle's object is to prove the doctrine of the preceding verse, viz. that right eousness is by faith. To do this it was necessary to show that men in themselves are exposed to condemnation, or are desti tute of any righteousness which can satisfy the demands of God. His argument is, God is just; he is determined to punish sin, and as all men are sinners, all are exposed to punishment. Hence this verse is connected by?dp to the preceding one. Men must be justified by faith, for the wrath of God is revealed, &c.

The wrath of G-od is his punitive justice, his determination to punish sin. The passion which is called anger or wrath, and which is always mixed more or less with malignity in the human breast, is of course infinitely removed from what the word imports when used in reference to God. Yet as anger in men leads to the infliction of evil on its object, the word is, agreeably to a principle which pervades the Scriptures, applied to the calm and undeviating purpose of the Divine mind, which secures the connection between sin and misery, with the same general uniformity that any other law in the physical or moral government of God operates.

Is revealed. ^AnoxaAOTirco is properly, to uncover, to bring to light, and hence to make known, whether by direct communica tion, or in some other way. A thing is said to be revealed, when it becomes known from its effects. It is thus that the thoughts of the heart, the arm of the Lord, and the wrath of God are said to be "revealed." It is not necessary therefore to infer from the use of this word, that the apostle meant to inti mate that the purpose of God to punish sin w^as made known by any special revelation. That purpose is manifested in various ways; by the actual punishment of sin, by the inherent tendency of moral evil to produce misery, by the voice of con science. Nor do the words "from heaven" imply any extraor dinary mode of communication. They are added because God dwells in heaven, whence all exhibitions of his character and purposes are said to proceed. It is however implied in the whole form of expression, that this revelation is clear and certain. Men know the righteous judgment of God; they know that those who commit sin are wrorthy of death. As this is an ultimate truth, existing in every man's consciousness, it is properly assumed, and made the basis of the apcstle'a argument.

This displeasure of God is revealed against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men; that is, against all impiety towards God (dasfisca,) and injustice towards men (ddexia.) This dis tinction is kept up in the following part of the chapter, in which the apostle proves first the impiety, and then the gross immorality of the heathen. Who hold the truth in unrighteous ness. The word d&y&eca is used in the Scriptures in a more comprehensive sense than our word truth. It often means what is right, as well as what is true; and is therefore often used in antithesis to doexia, unrighteousness, as in Horn. ii. 8; see Gal. iii. 1, v. 7. It is used especially of moral and religious truth; see John iii. 21, viii. 32, 2 Cor. iv. 2, 2 Thcss. ii. 12. It is therefore equivalent to true religion, that is, what is true and right, in reference to God and duty. As xaT£%ew sometimes means to have in the sense of possessing, as in 1 Cor. vii. 30, this clause1 may be rendered, 'Who have the truth, together with unrighteousness;' i. e. although they possess the truth, are unrighteous. Comp. James ii. 1, /JIT] £v TtpoacDnoXrj^iatz £/£rs -TjV -iar-v. The sentiment is then the same as in ver. 21, where the heathen are said to know God, and yet to act wickedly. But as xaTsysw also means to detain, to repress or hinder, 2 The.ss. ii. (J, T, the passage may be translated, Who hinder or oppose the truth. The great majority of commenta tors are in favour of this latter interpretation. The words Iv dd'/.ia may either express the means of this opposition, and be rendered, tlirough unrighteousness; or they may be taken adverbially, Who unjustly, or wickedly oppose the truth. The former is to be preferred.

VERSE 10. That this opposition is wicked, because inex cusable on the plea of ignorance, is proved in this and the following verses. They wickedly oppose the truth, because the knowledge of God is manifest among them. Agreeably to this explanation, this verse is connected with the immediately pre ceding clause. It may however refer to the general sentiment of ver. 18. God will punish the impiety and unrighteousness of men, because he has made himself known to them. The former method is to be preferred as more in accordance with the apostle's manner, and more consistent with the context, inasmuch as he goes on to prove that the impiety of the heathen is inexcusable. Since that which may be known of Grod, is manifest in them. This version is not in accordance with the meaning of yvcocrTby, which always in the Bible means, what is known, not what may be known. Besides, the English version seems to imply too much; for the apostle does not mean to say that everything that may be known concerning God was revealed to the heathen, but simply that they had such a know ledge of him as rendered their impiety inexcusable. We find fvaxjTOZ used in the sense of fvcoroz, known, Acts i. 19, ii. 14, xv. 18, yvcotTTa ax accouoz earc rw Osw r.d^ra ra l^a O.UTOD; and often elsewhere. Hence TO fvaxjrou is=fua>fftz, as in Gen. ii. 9, ^vctxrrov roi) xa),ol) xal TOO Trov/jpou. The knowledge of God does not mean simply a knowledge that there is a God, but, as appears from what follows, a knowledge of his nature and attributes, his eternal power and Godhead, ver. 20, and his justice, ver. 32. (fiavspov zarw sv auTot^, may be rendered, either is manifest among them, or in them. If the former translation be adopted, it is not to be understood as declaring that certain men, the Pythagoreans, Platonists, and Stoics, as Grotius says, had this knowledge; but that it was a common revelation, accessible, manifest to all. In them, however, here more properly means, in their minds. "In ipsorum animis," says Beza, "quia haec Dei notitia recondita est in intimis mentis penetralibus, ut, velint nolint idololatrse, quoties sese adhibent in consilium, toties a seipsis redarguantur." It is not of a mere external revelation of which the apostle is speaking, but of that evidence of the being and perfections of God which every man has in the constitution of his own nature, and in virtue of which he is competent to apprehend the manifesta tions of God in his works, for Grod hath revealed to them., viz. the knowledge of himself. This knowledge is a revelation; it is the manifestation of God in his works, and in the consti tution of our nature. "Quod dicit," says Calvin, "Deum manifcstasse, scnsus est, ideo conditum esse hominem, ut spec tator sit fabrise mundi; ideo datos ei oculos, ut intuitu tarn pulchroe imaginis, ad auctorem ipsum fcratur." God there fore has never left himself without a witness. His existence and perfections have ever been so manifested that his rational creatures are bound to acknowledge and worship him as the true and only God.

VERSE 20. This verse is a confirmation and amplification of the preceding, inasmuch as it proves that God does manifest himself to men, shows how this manifestation is made, and draws the inference that men are, in virtue of this revelation, inexcusable for their impiety. The argument is, God has mani fested the knowledge of himself to men, for the invisible things of him, that is, his eternal power and Godhead are, since the creation, clearly seen, being understood by his works; they are therefore without excuse. The invisible things of him. By the invisible things of God, Theodoret says we are to understand creation, providence, and the divine judgments; Theophylact understands them to refer to his goodness, wisdom, power, and majesty. Between these interpretations the moderns are divided. The great majority prefer the latter, which is obvi ously the better suited to the context, because the works of God are expressed afterwards by -ocr^w.^a, and because the invisible things are those which are manifested by his works, and are explained by the terms "power and Godhead." The subsequent clause, y re dioco^ WJTO~J dfoufjuz xat u-scorqz, is in apposition with and an explanation of the former one. The particle TS followed by xai, serves then, as Tholuck remarks, to the partition of don a' a into the two ideas dwa/juz and d-ztorrfi, and not to annex a distinct idea, as though the meaning were, 'and also his power and Godhead.' The power of God is more immediately manifested in his works; but not his power alone, but his divine excellence in general, which is expressed by tfc.'or^c, from &s2o^. Osorr^, from 0so^ on the other hand, expresses the being, rather than the excellence of God. The latter is Godhead; the former, divinity, a collective term for all the divine perfections.

This divine revelation has been made d~o XT'XTZCO^ zoff/wv, from the creation of the ivorld, not by the creation; for /r.'^c here is the act of creation, and not the thing created; and the means by which the revelation is made, is expressed immedi ately by the words ro?c ~oqtmm, which would then be redun dant. The -oiYjaara rorj 6>soD, in this connection, are the things made by God, rather than the things done by him. The apostle says the do par a xa&oparat, the unseen things are seen, because they are perceived by the mind; voou/jteva being under stood by means of the things made. So that they are inexcusa ble. These words are by Griesbach, Knapp, and others, made to depend on the last clause of ver. 19; and then the interpre tation of Beza and the elder Calvinists would be the most natural. God has revealed the knowledge of himself to men, in order that they might be without excuse. But this, to say the least, is unnecessary. The connection with xad-opHrcu is per fectly natural. ' The perfections of God, being understood by his works, are seen, so that men are without excuse.' Paul does not here teach that it is the design of God, in revealing himself to men, to render their opposition inexcusable, but rather, since this revelation has been made, they have in fact no apology for their ignorance and neglect of God. Though the revelation of God in his works is sufficient to render men inexcusable, it does not follow that it is sufficient to lead men, blinded by sin, to a saving knowledge of himself. As Paul says of the law, that it was weak through the flesh, that is, insufficient on account of our corruption, so it may be said of the light of nature, that, although sufficient in itself as a revelation, it is not sufficient, considering the indisposition and inattention of men to divine things. " Sit haec distinctio," says Calvin, " demonstrate Dei, qua gloriam suam in creaturis perspicuam facit, esse, quantum ad lucem suam, satis evidentem; quantum ad nostram csecitatcm, non adeo sufficere. Cseterum non ita cseci sumus, ut ignorantiam possimus prsetexere, quin perversitatis arguamur."

VERSE 21. Since 'knowing Crod. The most natural and obvious connection of this verse is with the last clause of the preceding, ' Men are without excuse, since, although they knew God, they worshipped him not as God.' This connection, moreover, is in accordance with the apostle's manner, who often establishes a proposition, which is itself an inference, by a new process of argument. Thus in the present instance, in vs. 19, 20, he proved that the heathen had a knowledge of God which rendered them inexcusable, and then the fact that they were without excuse, is proved by showing that they did not act in accordance with the truth. Kiickert, however, who is followed by Tholuck, considering that the apostle's object is to show that the heathen wickedly oppose the truth, as stated in ver. 18; and that this proof consists of two parts, first, the heathen had the knowledge of the truth, vs. 19, 20, and secondly, that they did not act according to it, vs. 21—23; assumes that the connection is rather with the last clause of ver. 18, and that something is implied here which is not expressed, and that the logical reference of deort is to this omitted thought. ' The heathen are without excuse, and wick edly oppose the truth, since although they knew God, they glorified him not as God.' This sense is good enough, but it is a forced and unnatural interpretation.

The apostle having shown in ver. 19, that the knowledge of God was revealed to men, has no hesitation in saying that the' heathen knew God; which (iocs not mean merely that they had the opportunity of knowing him, but that in the constitution of their own nature, and in the works of creation, they actually possessed an intelligible revelation of the Divine existence and perfections. This revelation was indeed generally so neglected, that men knew not what it taught. Still they had the know ledge, in the same sense that those who have the Bible are said to have the knowledge of the will of God, however much they may neglect and disregard it. In both cases there is knowledge presented, and a revelation made, and in both ignorance is without excuse. As there is no apology for the impiety of the heathen to be found in any unavoidable ignorance, their idola try was the fruit of depravity. The apostle therefore says, that although they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful to him. Aozd^» is to ascribe llonour to any one, to praise, and also to honour, to make glorious, or cause that others should honour any one. Men are said to glorify God either when they ascribe glory to him, or when they so act as to lead others to honour him. In the present case, the former idea is expressed by the word. They did not reverence and worship God as their God; neither did they refer to him the blessings which they daily received at his

Instead of thus rendering unto God the homage and gr; tude which an his due, they became vain in their imaginations.

Vain, (lp.aTcua>&rjaay) that is, according to coLstant scriptural usage, became both foolish and wicked. Vain conversation is corrupt conversation, 1 Pet. i. 18; and vanity is wickedness, Eph. iv. 17. These words are all frequently used in reference to idolatry, as idols are in the Bible often called ndraca, vanities. In their imaginations, deaAofefffjLOtG, properly thoughts, but usu ally, in the New Testament, with the implication of evil; evil thoughts or machinations. Here the word also has a bad sense. The thoughts of the heathen concerning God were perverted and corrupt thoughts. The whole clause therefore means, that the heathen, in refusing to recognize the true God, entertained foolish and wicked thoughts of the Divine Being; that is, they sank into the foll^ and sin of idolatry. And their foolish heart was darkened; they lost the light of divine knowledge; d^vsroc, destitute of auvzacz understanding, insight into the nature of divine things. The consequence of this want of divine know ledge was darkness. The word xapdla, heart, stands for the whole soul. Hence men are said to understand with the heart, Matt. xiii. 15; to believe with the heart, Rom. x. 10; the heart is said to be enlightened with knowledge, 2 Cor. iv. 6; and the eyes of the heart are said to be opened, Eph. i. 8. The word dtavoia, mind, is used with the same latitude, not only for the intellect, but also for the seat of the affections, as in Eph. ii. 3, we read of the desires of the mind. It is not merely intel lectual darkness or ignorance which the apostle describes in this verse, but the whole moral state. We find throughout the Scriptures the idea of foolishness and sin, of wisdom and piety, intimately connected. In the language of the Bible, a fool is an impious man; the wise are the pious, those who fear God; foolishness is sin; understanding is religion. The folly and darkness of which the apostle here speaks, are therefore ex pressive of want of divine knowledge, which is both the effect and cause of moral depravity.

VERSE 22. Professing themselves to be ivise. (Pdaxovret; elvai ao(fol, (for tfc^o^c, by attraction.) Saying in the sense of pre tending to be. The more they boasted of their wisdom, the more conspicuous became their folly. What greater folly can there be, than to worship beasts rather than God? To this the apostle refers in the next verse.

VERSE 23. They became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible Grod for the likeness of the image of corruptible man. Herein consisted their amazing folly, that they, as rational beings, should worship the creature in preference to the Creator. The common construction of the verb dtidffff&v in Greek when it means to exchange, is either ri rrvoc, or rr divri TWOS* but the apostle imitates the Hebrew construction, 2 "PTan, which by the LXX. is rendered &Hdffff$ev cv, as in Ps. cvi. 20. The sense is not that they change one thing into another, but that they exchanged one thing for another. The glory, a collective* term for all the divine perfections. They exchanged the substance for the image, the substantial or real divine glories for the likeness of an image of corruptible wan, i. e. an image like to corruptible man. The contrast is not merely between God and man, or between the incorruptible, imperishable, eternal God, and frail man, but between this incorruptible God and the image of a man. It was not, how ever, in the worship of the images of men only that the degra dation of the heathen was manifested, for they paid religious homage to birds, beasts, and reptiles. In such idolatry the idol or animal was, with regard to the majority, the ultimate object of worship. Some professed to regard the visible image as a mere symbol of the real object of their adoration; while others believed that the gods in some way filled these idols, and operated through them; and others again, that the universal principle of being was reverenced under these manifestations. The Scriptures take no account of these distinctions. All who l)o wed down to stocks and stones are denounced as wor shipping gods which their own hands had made; and idolatry is made to include not merely the worship of false gods, but the worship of the true God by images. The universal prevalence of idolatry among the heathen, notwithstanding the revelation which God had made of himself in his works, is the evidence which Paul adduces to prove that they arc ungodly, and conse quently exposed to that wrath which is revealed against all ungodliness. In the following verses, to the end of the chap ter, he shows that they are unrighteous; that as the con sequence of their departure from God, they sank into the grossest vices.

VERSE 24. WJierefore also he gave them, in their lusts, unto uncleanness. The most natural construction of this passage is to connect e/c dxa&apffiav with napeficoxev, he gave up unto uncleanness. We have the same construction in vs. 26, 28, and frequently elsewhere. To construct TLapeoojxsu with Iv TCUZ iitt&UfJLicuz, as Beza and others do, gives indeed a good sense, He gave them up to their desires unto uncleanness, i. e. so that they became unclean, but is opposed to the con stant usage of the New Testament, inasmuch as TcapadidtofJU never occurs in construction with sv. If the former construc tion be adopted, Iv ra?c fag&ufjucui; may be rendered as in our version, through their lusts; or better in their lusts; Iv ex pressing their condition, or circumstances: them in their lusts, i. e. being in them, immersed in them. To dishonour, TOIJ aTt/mreff&at. This infinitive with rou may depend on the pre ceding noun; 'the uncleanness of dishonouring,' &c., " quse cernebatur in," &c. Winer, § 45. 4. b. But as the infinitive with the genitive article is so frequently used to express design, or simple sequence, it is better to make it depend on the whole preceding clause, ' He gave them up to uncleanness, to dis honour,' i. e. either in order that they might dishonour, or so that they dishonoured, &c.; &TtfJtd££cr&at may be taken either as middle, so that they dishonoured their bodies; or as passive, so that their bodies were dishonoured. The former best suits the context. ' Ev ea'JTotz is either equivalent to iv aXAi/jAoa;, reci procally, they dishonoured one another, as to their bodies; or in themselves, dishonouring their bodies in themselves; "significantius exprimit," says Calvin, "quam profundas et ineluibiles ignominies notas corporibus suis inusserint."

This abandonment of the heathen to the dominion of sin is represented as a punitive infliction. They forsook God, dib xai, wherefore also he gave them up to uncleanness. This is explained as a simple permission on the part of God. But it removes no real difficulty. If God permits those who forsake him, to sink into vice, he does it intelligently and inten tionally. The language of the apostle, as well as the analogy of Scripture, demands more than this. It is at least a judicial abandonment. It is as a punishment for their apostasy that God gives men up to the power of sin. Tradidit Deus ut Justus judex. He withdraws from the wicked the restraints of hig providence and grace, and gives them over to the dominion of sin. God is presented in the Bible as the absolute moral and physical ruler of the world. lie governs all things according to the counsel of his own will and the nature of his creatures. What happens as consequences does not come by chance, but as designed; and the sequence is secured by his control. "It is beyond question," says Tholuck, "that, according to the doctrine of the Old and New Testaments, sin is the punish ment of sin." So the Rabbins teach, "The reward of a good deed is a good deed, and of an evil deed, an evil deed." This is also the teaching of all experience. We see that sin fol lows sin as an avenger. De Wette truly says, "Diese Ansicht ist nicht bloss judisch, sondcrn allgemein walir vom absolutcn Standpunktc der Religion aus." "This is no mere Jewish doctrine, but it is universally true from the absolute stand-point of religion." God is not a mere idle spectator of the order of events; he is at once the moral governor and efficient controller of all things. "Man is not 'a virtue-machine,' " says Meyer, "when God rewards virtue with virtue; neither is he ' a sinmachine,' when God punishes sin with sin." Men are as frco in sinning as they are in obeying; and what in one passage arid from one point of view, is properly presented as the work of God, in another passage and from another point of view, is no less properly presented as the work of man. What is here said to be God's work, in Eph. iv. 19, is declared to be the sinner's own work.

A'HRSE 2"). Whu ehanf/e, (o^Tr^s-.) The pronoun has a causal sense, being such as those who, i. e. because they exchanged the, truth of God for a lie. The construction is the same as in vcr. 23, //sr^'//^r/y £y, they exchanged for, not, they changed into. The truth of God, either a periphrase for the true God, or the truth concerning God, i. e. right conceptions of God. For a lie, that is, either a false god, or falsehood, i. c. false views of God. The former is the better explanation. The glory of God is God himself as glorious, and the truth of God, in this connection, is God himself as true; that is, the true God. In the Old Testament, as in Jer. xiii. 25, xvi. 19, the gods of the heathen are spoken of as lies. Anything which is not what it pretends to be, or what it is supposed to be, is in the Scriptures called a lie. The proof of this apostasy is, that they worshipped (£ffs£ld<r&ijffav) and served (Hdrpeoaav.) These words are often synonymous, both being used to express inward reverence and outward worship; although the former properly expresses the feeling, and the latter the outward service. The creature (xrlffzfj) not the creation, but any particular created thing. This noun belongs, in sense, to both the preceding verbs, although the first by itself would require the accusative. More than the Creator, xaoa rov xriffavTa, i. e. beyond, in the sense of more than, or in the sense of passing by, neglecting; "pneterito Crcatore," as Beza translates. The latter suits best. Who is blessed for ever. Amen. Who, notwithstanding the neglect of the heathen, is the ever-blessed God. This is the natural tribute of reverence toward the God whom men dis honoured by their idolatry. The word luXofyroz is by Harless, Epli. i. 3, and by Meyer, made to mean praised, as the Hebrew Y'"1-) to which it so constantly answers; not, therefore, worthy of praise, but who is in fact the object of praise to all holy beings. Brctschneider (Lexicon,) Tholuck, and others, render it u celebrandus, vencrandus." Amen is properly a Hebrew adjective, signifying true or faithful. At the beginning of a sentence it is often used adverbially, verily, assuredly; at the end of a sentence it is used to express assent, it is true, so let it be. Paul says Amen to the declaration that God is the everblessed.

VEIISK 26. For this cause, &c. That is, because they wor shipped the creature rather than the Creator, God gave them up to corrupt affections. Hatty d.rctua^, shameful lusts, pas sions which are degrading, and the indulgence of which covers men with ignominy. This verse is therefore an amplification of the idea expressed in ver. 24. The reasons why Paul refers in the first instance to the sins of uncleanness, in illustration and proof of the degradation of the heathen, probably were, that those sins are always intimately connected with idolatry, forming at times even a part of the service rendered to the false gods; that in turning from God and things spiritual, men naturally sink into the sensual; that the sins in question are peculiarly degrading; and that they were the most notorious, prevalent, and openly acknowledged of all the crimes of the heathen world. This corruption of morals was confined to no one class or sex. The description given by profane writers, of the moral corruption of the ante-Christian ages, is in all respects as revolting as that presented by the apostle. Of this the citations of AVetstein arid Grotius furnish abundant proof. Paul first refers to the degradation of females among the heathen, because they are always the last to be affected in the decay of morals, and their corruption is therefore proof that all virtue is lost.

VERSE 27. The apostle for the third time repeats the idea that the moral degradation of the heathen was a punishment of their apostasy from God. Receiving, he says, in themselves the meet re-cutti/tenae of their error. It is obvious from the whole context that ~~/Avrt here refers to the sin of forsaking the true God; and it is no less obvious that the recompense or punish ment of this apostasy was the moral degradation which he had just described.

The heathen themselves did not fail to see the intimate con nection between impiety and vice. Silius, iv. 71*4. u lieu primie sceleruin cau.-vc mortahbus iegris naturam nescire Deum. Cicero De natura Deorum, 12. Ilaud scio, an, pietate adversus Dcos sublata, (ides etiam et societas, et una excellentissima virtus justitia tollatur." Sec WETSTEIX. Those therefore who would merge religion into morality, or who suppose that moral ity can be sustained without religion, are more ignorant than the heathen. They not only shut their eyes to all the teach ings both of philosophy and of history, but array against them selves the wrath of God, who has revealed his purpose to abandon to the most degrading lusts those who apostatize from him.

VERSE 28. And an the// did not think it wortli while to retain G-od in their knowledge, he gave them up to a reprobate mind. Another repetition of the sentiment is expressed in vs. 24, 26, that God abandons those who abandon him. And as, xac xad-oj^. The cases arc parallel; as they deserted God, so God abandoned them; comp. John xvii. 2. They did not like, oux idoxi/jiafffw; the verb means to try or put to the test, to ex amine, to approve, and, lignum habere, to regard as worthy,

1 Cor. xvi. 3, 1 Thess. ii. 4, and when followed by an infinitive, to think it worth while. The heathen did not think it worth the trouble to retain the knowledge of God. They considered reli gion as useless, and supposed they could live without God. The phrase £%ztv ev Imj'vcoffet is stronger than simply to know; both because err^-voWc, full knowledge, is stronger than f\*wai~, and because £/^v Jv lm[vd)ff£t is stronger than imfeYvwffxeev. The text therefore means to retain in accurate or practical know ledge. It was the practical recognition of the only true God, whose eternal power and Godhead are revealed in his works, that men were unwilling constantly to make. G-od gave them up to a reprobate mind. Beza, Bengel, and others, give dooxetJtoz here the sense of judicii expers, incapable of judgment or discernment. But this is contrary to usage, and contrary to the etymology of the word. Abxtjioz, from diyouai, means receivable, worthy of being received; and ddoxt/wz, worthy of rejection, reprobate. To do things not becoming; that is, to do things not becoming: the nature and duties of man. Of the things meant, the following verses contain a long and painful catalogue. /7o^c?v is the exegetical infinitive, to do, that is, so that they did. It expresses the consequence of the dereliction just spoken of, and the natural fruit of a reprobate mind.

VERSES 29 — 31. Being filled with all unrighteousness, forni cation, wickedness, &c. The accusative nerrtypcofjieyouz is con nected with a'jro'jc of the preceding verse. lie gave them up, filled with all unrighteousness; or it depends on the preceding infinitive ~o.'£?y, so that they, filled with all unrighteousness, should commit, &c. It is not so connected with Ttapsdcoxev, as to imply that God gave them up after they were thus corrupt, but it is so connected with xotdv as to express the consequence of God's abandoning them to do the things which are not con venient. The crimes here mentioned were not of rare occur rence. The heathen were filled with them. They not only abounded, but in many cases were palliated and even justified. Dark as the picture here drawn is, it is not so dark as that pre sented by the most distinguished Greek and Latin authors, of their own countrymen. Commentators have collected a fearful array of passages from the ancient writers, which more than sustain the account given by the apostle. We select a single passage from Senca de Ira, II. 8: " Omnia sceleribus ac vitiis

plena sunt; plus committitur quam quod possit coercitione sanari. Certatur ingenti quodam nequitise certamine; major quotidie peccandi cupiditas, minor verecundia est. Expulso melioris aequiorisque respectu, quocunque visum est, libido se impingit; nee furtiva jam scelcra sunt, printer oculos cunt. Adeoque in publicuni rnissa nequitia est, ct in omnium pectoribus evaluit, ut innocentia rion rara, sed nulla sit. Numquid enim singuli aut pauci rupere legem? undique? velut signo dato, ad fas nefasque miscendum coorti sunt." What Paul says of the

ancJerit heathen world, is found to be true in all its essential features of men of all generations. Wherever men have ex isted, there have they shown themselves to be sinners, ungodly, arid unrighteous, and therefore justly exposed to the wrath of God. Of the vices with which the heathen were filled, xof&sla stands first as the most prominent; xovrjpia, malice, the dispo sition to inflict evil; rr/£oj/£^rV/, rapacity, the desire to have more than is our due; xaxia, malignity, malrce in exercise; cftoiso^ and cn^o^, envy and murder, united either from simi larity in sound, or because the former tends to the latter; epc$, oo/oc, Contention and fraud, nearly related evils. The primary meaning of oo/oc is a bait, food exposed to entrap an animal; then the disposition to deceive, or an act of deception; xaxorfii'.d. (xuxnz and /J^^cO malc/'ul'nee, the disposition to make the worst of everything; c'v^'^^r^'c, a lohisperer, clandestine slan derer; xt/-fi)sjLk>~, a detractor, one who speaks against others; $£OtfT'Jj^'c, hateful to God, or J/atiiif/ God. Usage is in favour of the passive sense, the connection of the active. All wicked men, and not any one particular class, are the objects of the divine displeasure. To meet this difficulty, Meyer proposes to make tins word a mere qualification of the preceding, Grodabliorred detractors. This, however, is out of keeping with the whole passage. The great majority of commentators adopt the active sense. Then follow three designations, expressive of the different forms of pride, u^o^ral, the insolent; dxspr/ydvot, the self -conceited; a/oCov£C, boasters; l<pz'Jtoz-ae xaxtov, inventors of crimes; disobedient to parents. That such should be included in this fearful list, shows the light in which filial disobedience is regarded by the sacred writers. In vcr. 31, all the words begin with the d privative, aaoverous. without (crjvs,m$) insight into moral or religious things, i. e. blinded, besotted, so as to think evil good, and good evil; aaoud-sro'JZ, perfidious; aarbpf«yc, those in whom the natural affection for parents or child ren is suppressed; aar.bvoo'j^, implacable; d.vzA£'/j/j.oyaz, without pity.

VERSE 32. Who well knowing the righteous judgment of Crod; that is, although they well know, &c. They were (oFr^sc) such as who. The heathen whose acts had been just described, are declared to be, Men who, although they Imeiu the righteous judgment, &c., (otxaUo/ia) decree, a declaration of what is right and just; and or/acco/m TOL> 0zoi> is the declaration of God as to what is right and just. The import of this declaration is con tained in the clause, that they who do (xpdaaoum, commit) such things are worthy of death. By death here, as often elsewhere, is meant punishment, in the general meaning of that word. It expresses the penalty of the law, and includes all evil inflicted for the satisfaction of justice. Paul therefore teaches that the heathen knew they deserved punishment for their crimes, or in other words, that they were justly exposed to the wrath of God, which was revealed against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men. The source of this knowledge he explains in the fol lowing chapter, ver. 14. It was a knowledge written on their hearts, or included in the constitution of their nature; it was implied in their being moral agents. As he had before shown that the impiety of the heathen was without excuse, inasmuch as they had a knowledge of the true God, so here he shows that their immorality was inexcusable, since their sins were not com mitted in ignorance of their nature or desert. This passage also shows that the judicial abandonment of God does not destroy the free agency or responsibility of men. They are given up to work iniquity, and yet know that they deserve death for what they do. The stream which carries them away is not without, but within. It is their own corrupt nature. It is themselves. Notwithstanding this knowledge of the ill-desert of the crimes above enumerated, they not only commit them, but approve cf those who do (or practise) them. This is the lowest point of degradation, To sin, even in the heat of pas sion, is evil; but to delight in the sins of others, shows that men are of set purpose and fixed preference, wicked. Such is the apostle's argument to prove that the heathen are all under Bin, that they are justly chargeable with ungodliness and unrighteousness, and consequently exposed to the wrath of God.

1. The punitive justice of God is an essential attribute of his nature. This attribute renders the punishment of sin neces sary, and is the foundation of the need of a vicarious atone ment in order to the pardon of sinners. This doctrine the apostle assumes as a first principle, and makes it the basis of his whole exposition of the doctrine of justification, ver. 18.

2. That sin is a proper object of punishment, and that, under the righteous government of God, it will be punished, are moral axioms, which have "a self-evidencing light," whenever proposed to the moral sense of men, vs. 18, 82.

3. God has never left himself without a witness among his rational creatures. Both in reference to his own nature and to the rule of duty, he has, in his works and in the human heart, given sufficient light to render the impiety and immorality of men inexcusable, vs. 11), 20, 82.

4. Natural religion is not a sufficient guide to salvation. What individual or what nation lias it ever led to right views of God or of his law? The experience of the whole world, under all the variety of circumstances in which men have existed, proves its insufficiency; and, consequently, the neces sity of a special divine revelation, vs. 21 — 23.

5. The heathen, who have only the revelation of God in his works and in their own hearts, aided by the obscure tradition ary knowledge which has come down to them, need the gospel. In point of fact, the light which they enjoy does not lead them to God and holiness, vs. 21 — 23.

6. Error (on moral and religious subjects) has its root in depravity. Men are ignorant of God and duty, because they do not like to retain him in their knowledge, vs. 21, 28.

7. God often punishes one sin by abandoning the sinner to the commission of others. Paul repeats this idea three times, vs. 24, 26, 28. This judicial abandonment is consistent with the holiness of God and the free agency of man. God does noi impel or entice to evil. He ceases to restrain. He says of the sinner, Let him alone, vs. 24 — 28.

8. Religion is the only true foundation, and the only effectual safeguard for morality. Those who abandon God, he abandons. Irreligion and immorality, therefore, have ever been found inse parably connected, vs. 24 — 28.

9. It evinces, in general, greater depravity to encourage others in the commission of crimes, and to rejoice in their com mission, than to commit them one's self, ver. 32.

10. The most reprobate sinner carries about with him a knowledge of his just exposure to the wrath of God. Con science can never be entirely extirpated, ver. 32.

1. It lies in the very nature of sin, that it should be inex cusable, and worthy of punishment. Instead, therefore, of palliating its enormity, we should endeavour to escape from its penalty, vs. 18, 32.

2. As the works of God reveal his eternal power and God head, we should accustom ourselves to see in them the mani festations of his perfections, vs. 18 — 21.

3. The human intellect is as erring as the human heart. We can no more find truth than holiness, when estranged from God; even as we lose both light and heat, when we depart from the sun. Those, in every age, have sunk deepest into folly, who have relied most on their own understandings. "In thy light only, 0 God, can we see light," ver. 21, &c.

4. If the sins of the heathen, committed under the feeble light of nature, be inexcusable, how great must be the aggravation of those committed under the light of the Scriptures, ver. 20.

5. As the light of nature is insufficient to lead the heathen to God and holiness, it is one of the most obvious and urgent of our duties to send them the light of the Bible, vs. 20 — 23.

6. Men should remember that their security from open and gross sins is not in themselves, but in God; and they should regard as the worst of punishments, his withdrawing from them his Holy Spirit, vs. 24—28.

7. Sins of uncleanness are peculiarly debasing and demoral izing. To be preserved from them is mentioned in Scripture as a mark of the divine favour, Eccl. vii. 26, Prov. xxii. 14; to be abandoned to them, as a mark of reprobation.

8. To take pleasure in those who do good, makes us better; as to delight in those who do evil, is the surest way to become even more degraded than they are themselves, ver. 32.

THE object of this chapter is to establish the same charges against the Jews, which had just been proved against the Gentiles; to show that they also were exposed to the wrath of God. It consists of three parts. The first contains an exhi bition of those simple principles of justice upon which all men are to be judged, vs. 1 — 16. The second is an application of these principles to the case of the Jews, vs. 17 — 24. The third is an exhibition of the true nature and design of circumcision, intended to show that the Jews could not expect exemption on the ground of that rite, vs. 25 — 30.

THAT men so impious and immoral, as those described in the preceding chapter, deserved the divine displeasure, and could never, by their own works, secure the favour of God, the Jew was prepared readily to admit. But might there not be a set of men, who, in virtue of some promise on the part of God, or of the performance of some special duties, could claim exemp tion from the execution of God's purpose to punish all sin? To determine this point, it was necessary to consider a little more fully the justice of God, in order to see whether it admitted of impunity to sinners on the ground supposed This first section of the chapter, therefore, is employed in expanding the principle of ver. 18 of the first chapter. It contains a development of those principles of justice which commend themselves at once to every man's conscience. The first is, that he who condemns in others what he does himself, does thereby condemn himself, ver. 1. The second, that God's judgments are according to the truth or real state of the case, ver. 2. The third, that the special goodness of God, manifested towards any individual or people, forms no ground of exemp tion from merited punishment; but being designed to lead them to repentance, when misimproved aggravates their condemna tion, vs. 3 — 5. The fourth, that the ground of judgment is the works, not the external relations or professions of men: God will punish the wicked and reward the good, whether Jew or Gentile, without the least respect of persons, vs. 6 — 11. The fifth, that the standard of judgment is the light which men have severally enjoyed. Those having a written law shall be judged by it, and those who have only the law written on their hearts, (and that the heathen have such a law is proved by the opera tions of conscience, vs. 13 — 15,) shall be judged by that law, ver. 12. These are the principles according to which all men are to be judged in the last day, by Jesus Christ, ver. 16.

VERSE 1. In order to appreciate the force of the apostle's reasoning in this and the following verses, it should be remem bered that the principal ground on which the Jews expected acceptance with God, was the covenant which he had made with their father Abraham, in which he promised to be a God to him and to his seed after him. They understood this pro mise to secure salvation of all who retained their connection with Abraham, by the observance of the law and the rite of circumcision. They expected, therefore, to be regarded and treated not so much as individuals, each being dealt with according to his personal character, but as a community to whom salvation was secured by the promise made to Abraham. Paul begins his argument at a distance; he states his principles in such general terms, that they could not fail to secure the assent of the Jew, before he was aware of their application to himself. That the Jews are addressed in this chapter is evident from the whole strain of the argument, and from the express application of the reasoning of the case of the Jews, from ver. IT onward. This view of the passage is now generally adopted, though many of the earlier commentators supposed either that no particular class of persons is here addressed, or that the apostle has in view the better portion of the heathen, or at least those who did not seem to approve of the crimes mentioned in the preceding chapter, but rather condemned them.

The connection between this chapter and what precedes, as indicated by the particle 0^6, whcrrfi,/;-. is somewhat doubtful. Some suppose the inference to be drawn from the doctrine taught from ver. 1<S of the preceding chapter, (jod is just, and determined to punish all unrighteousness and ungodliness of men: wherefore they are without excuse who commit the sins which they condemn in others. In this case, however, the con clusion is not exactly in the form suited to the premises. It is not so much the incxcusablencss of sinners as the exposure to punishment, that follows from the justice of (!od. Most com mentators therefore consider the inference as drawn from the last verse of the preceding chapter. It is there said that all men know that those who sin are worthy of death; and the inference is, that thev who commit sin are without excuse, how ever censorious their self-conceit mav render them towards others. Yvv/y/ one wJt» judge*. Though from what follows it is plain that the Jews are here intended, yet for the reasons above stated the proposition is made general. Kfnv coy, judging; but by implication, condemning. Fur -ir he rein t/i»u jmlgent another, tliou condemnest tltyxelf. Wherein (kv c/3,) either in the thing which, or thereby, i. e. in the same judgment, or whilst. See Mark ii. 19, John v. 7. The reason of this asser tion is given in the following clause, for thou that jwlgext docst the same things. It is the thing done which is the ground of condemnation; and therefore he who condemns the act, con demns the agent, whether the agent be himself or some one else, whether he be a Jew or a Gentile.

VERSE 2. But we know. That is, however perverse and partial may be the judgment you pass on yourself, we know, &c. We does not refer to the Jews, as peculiarly instructed, but to all men. Every one knows. The proposition contained in this verse is: The judgment of Grod is against those who do such things. That is, however they may excuse themselves, God will judge them. The words xara atyftztav, therefore, do not form the predicate of the sentence, as though the sense were, The judgment of God is according to truth. The mean ing rather is, the judgment of God, which is according to truth, is against those, £c. There are two things therefore asserted, the certainty of this divine judgment, and its being according to truth, i. e. without error, without respect of persons. It is not founded upon mere appearances or professions, but upon the real truth of the case. Comp. Prov. xxix. 14, kv curftda xplucov T:TCO%O'JZ, and John viii. 16, /y xpiatz jj Ipy dtydrfi ianv. This verse then contains the second general principle of justice, according to which all men, whether Jews or Gentiles, are to be judged. The whole hope of the Jews was founded on the assumption that the judgment of God regarding them would be guided by some other rule than truth. He was not to judge them according to their real merits, but according to their national and ecclesiastical relations, just as men now hope to be saved because they belong to the true Church.

VERSE 3. But thinJcest thou this, 0 man, that judgest, &c. The truth that God's judgment is just, and will fall on those who themselves commit the sins which they condemn in others, is so plain, that the apostle exclaims at the folly of those who seem to deny it. The emphasis lies on the word thou, in the middle of the verse. Dost thou think that thou, a Jew, and because a Jew, shalt escape the righteous judgment of God? Shalt escape, Ixipeugij. "Every one," says Bengel, "who 13 arraigned, (psuyst, tries to escape; he who is acquitted, exysufse, escapes." In ver. 1, the apostle had shown that the man who did what he condemned in others, condemned himself. "If then," as Theophylact says, "he cannot escape his own judgment, how can he escape the judgment of God? If forced to condemn ourselves, how much more wrill the infi nitely Holy condemn us?" The ground on which this false and absurd expectation rested is mentioned in the following

VERSE 4. Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness, and forbearance, and lon<j-mfferin<j? That is, admitting the general principle, that those who do what they condemn in others are themselves exposed to condemnation, do you expect exemption on the ground of the peculiar goodness of God? That this was the expectation of the Jews is plain from the apostle's argu ment here and in the following chapter, and from chap. ix. and xi. Comp. also Matt. iii. (J, " Think not to say, Wo have Abraham to our father," and John viii. oo. Despisest. To despise, *«r«p/>ov£7v, is to form a low estimate of. They despise the goodness of God, who form such a wrong estimate of it, as to suppose that it gives them a license to sin; who imagine that he will not punish, either because he long for bears, or because his goodness towards us is so great that wo shall escape, though others perish. The words j^ffronjCj ^°yjj-> and wwnoii'juia, express the Divine goodness under different aspects. The first means kindness in general, as expressed in giving favours; the second, patience; the third, forbearance, slowness in the infliction of punishment. The reason why the Jews, as referred to by the apostle, and men in general, thus abuse the goodness of God, is expressed by the clause, n»t knowing that the <j<>udn<'xs <>f <!<><l l-ndfth tln-e. t<> repentance. '//p/oaiv, not knowing, not. understanding; and here, not com prehending the true nature and design of. Men abuse the goodness of God, because they do not rightly apprehend that instead of indicating a purpose not to punish, it is designed to lead them to forsake their MIIS. The goodness of God leads us to repentance, because it shows us our duty towards a Ueing who is so kind, and because it gives us ground to hope for acceptance. "The word aj'^', leads" says Dr. Wordsworth, Canon of Westminster, in his elegant and scholarly work on the Greek Testament, "intimates not only the will of God, but the will of man. God leads, but man may refuse to be led: 'Deus ducit volentem duci,' as Bengel says, ' ducit suaviter non cogit necessitate.' ' Very true; but who gives the will to be led? Is there no preventing grace? Does not God work in us to will, as well as to do? Surely there is such a thing a3 being made willing without being forced. There is a middle ground between moral suasion and coercion. God supersedes the necessity of forcing, by making us willing in the day of his power. The apostle, however, is not here speaking cf gracious influence, but of the moral tendencies of providential dis pensations.

VERSE 5. The goodness of God, so far from being a ground of reasonable expectation that wre shall ultimately escape punishment, becomes, when abused, an aggravation of our guilt. This principle the apostle here applies to the Jews> who, through their abuse of the peculiar mercy of God, were treasuring up wrath for themselves. Kara as rrtv ffxAyporyrd GOD, after tliy hardness, i. e. as might be expected from thy hardness; agreeably to its nature and degree — zal dnzra^orrov xaoolav, heart incapable of repentance. " 'A/JtsTavoyroz, vim activam habet, animus, qui resipicere non potcst, poenitere nescius. Enervat hunc locum Grotius quum explicat, animus, qui poenitentiam non agit." Fritzsche. To treasure up is to lay up little by little, and thus accumulate a store of anything, whether good or evil. The abusers of God's goodness accumu late a store of wrath for themselves. '£v fyjtspq. oo-f?^ is com monly rendered unto the day of wrath; but this unnecessarily gives lit the force of etc. It is better, with De Wette, Meyer, and others, to connect Iv with dprfv, i wrath at or on the day of wrath.' They treasure up for themselves wrath at that day when wrath shall be manifested. That day is further described as the day aTioxa/.'jipzco^ dixcuoxpca'iaz rorj Osoi>, of the revelation of the righteous judgment of Grod. Some manuscripts insert xa: between d~oxaA'j(/>zco~ and dtxaioxptGiaz; which reading is preferred by Bengel, Wetstein, Mill, and Knapp. The sense then is, the day of revelation, and of the righteous judgment of (rod. The day of revelation, viz. of Christ, whose second coming is always associated in Scripture with the final judg ment; and therefore the day of revelation may well express the day of judgment. But as the phrase " day of revelation" nowhere else occurs in this sense, and as the oldest manuscripts are in favour of the common text, it should be allowed to stand. VERSE 6. Who ivill render to every man according to his works. This is the fourth important principle which the apostle teaches us regulates the judgment of God. He will judge men neither according to their professions nor their relations, but according to their works. The question at his bar will be, not whether a man is a Jew or a Gentile, whether he belongs to the chosen people or to the heathen world, but whether he has obeyed the law. This principle is amplified and applied in what follows, in vs. 7 — 11. The question has been asked, how the declaration that God will render to every man, whether Jew or Gentile, according to his works — to the good, eternal life, to the wicked, indignation and wrath —is to be reconciled witli the apostle's doctrine, that no man is justified by works, that right eousness and life arc not by works, but by faith, and through grace. In answering this question, two things are to be borne in mind. The first is, that notwithstanding the doctrine of gratuitous justification, and in perfect consistency with it, the apostle still teaches that the retributions of eternity are accord ing to our works. The good only are saved, and the wicked only are condemned. '• For we must all appear In-fore tho judgment-scat of Christ, that every one may receive the tilings done in his body, whether good or bad," '2 Cor. v. 10, Kph. vi. S. u Ueproborum," says Calvin, " malitiam justa ult ione si puniet Dominus, rependet illis quod meriti suiit. Rursum quia sanctificat, qiios olim statuit glorificare, in illis quoquo bona opera coronabit, sed non pro merito." With this accord tin' words of Bernard: "Bona opera sunt via regni. non causa rcgnandi." The wicked will be punished on account of their works, and according to their works; the righteous will be rewarded, not on account of, but according to their works. Good works are to them the evidence of their belonging to that class to whom, for Christ's sake, eternal life is graciously awarded; and they are, in some sense and to some extent, the measure of that reward. But it is more pertinent to remark, in the second place, that the apostle is not here teaching tho method of justification, but is laying down those general principles of justice, according to which, irrespective of the gospel, all men are to be judged. lie is expounding the law, not the gospel. And as the law not only says that death is the wages of.sin, hut also that those who keep its precepts shall live by them, so the apostle says, that God will punish the wicked and reward the righteous. This is perfectly consistent with what he afterwards teaches, that there are none righteous; that there are none who so ohey the law as to be entitled to the life which it promises; and that for such the gospel provides a plan of justification without works, a plan for saving those whom the law condemns. He is here combatting the false hopes of the Jews, who, though trusting to the law, were by the principles of the law exposed to condemnation. This he does to drive them from this false dependence, and to show them that neither Jew nor Gentile can be justified before the bar of that God, who, while he promises eternal life to the obedient, has revealed his purpose to punish the disobedient. All therefore that this passage teaches is, that irrespective of the gospel, to those who either never heard of it, or wrho having heard, reject it, the principle of judgment will be law.

VERSES 7, 8. The principle laid down in ver. G, is here amplified. God will render eternal life to the good, indignation and wrath to the wicked, without distinction of persons; to the Jews no less than to the Gentiles. Though the sense of these verses is plain, there is great difference of opinion as to the grammatical construction. The explanation adopted by our translators is perhaps the most natural, and is the one which is most generally followed. To the verb drrodcoffee of ver. 6, belong the two accusatives, ^cor^ atcovtov, and dvubv xal bo-fa; and the two datives, ro?c /ASV — ^'rtTo~}(Jt and ro?c os l£ Ipt&elaz. The accusatives oo~av xat rc'ir^ '/JJ.L d<p$o.paiay then of course depend on ^roy<r.', and zap u~oao^r^ ett^ou dfa&ou is an adverbial qualification. The passage then reads thus: "To those, who through perseverance in good works, seek glory, honour, and immortality, eternal life; but to those who are contentious, indignation and wrath." Another construction, adopted by Bengel, Fritzsche, and others, supposes that rol^ fj.ku zatT faoiwi/rp eoyoy dja&orj (soil, ouffi) are to be taken together; to those who are according to perseverance, i. e. to those who persevere; (comp. of za~d adpxa=oi aapxcxol, and ol xard //1/sv/y.tt— of Trj/su/^rr/o/.) The folio.ving clause, obzav — C/JTOW, is then in apposition with the preceding: "To those who persevere in good works, seeking glory, honour, and immortality, he will render eternal life." This view of the passage is recommended by the correspondence thus established between the ro?c [*sv xa& ur.o^ovr^ of ver. 7, and the ro?c os lz ipc&sia.^ of ver. 8. It is opposed, however, by the following con siderations: 1. The interpretation of the phrase ol *«#' u~ofjio^u epfo'j dfa&ou, is hardly borne out by a reference to the phrases ol xo~a. adpxa and ol xa-a Il^=rjtia. 2. The second clause of ver. 7, if a mere amplification of the first clause, should be introduced by xai, as in ver. 8: 7o?c os lz iptd-siaz, xat d-se&o'jfft. Luther, after Oecumenius, translates thus: " Welcher geben ivird Preis und Ehrc und unvergangliches "\Vesen denen, die mit Gcduld in guten Werken trachten nach dcm ewigen Leben:" "Who will give glory, honour, and immortality to those, who, in patient continuance in well-doing, seek eternal life." According to this view, the accusatives oo£#v, Teu7ji>, (Icdapciav, depend upon drzootbazc, and ^cor^ alcimov on ^Torjff!. But this tlie position of the words will hardly bear. Luther's fluent and forcible version is effected by an entire transposition of the clauses. The construction there fore first mentioned is on the whole to be preferred. In the English version of the words *«//" it-otto^y, xo~d is rendered through. So also Grotius, l)e Wcttc, and others. Sec 1 Cor. xii. 8, Eph. iii. o, 7. Others translate it by the Latin preposi tion sccundiim, according to, or in virtue of. *)'~oftoi<?'' is ren dered patien-ce by the Vulgate, and Luther; pat'u'nx t\rj><'<'f<iffoy by Be/a; constancy, or patient continuance, in our version. In illustration of the combination i)-onn^r^ zn-fo'j (rfajhr). coinp. u-of/.o'^ r^c C/TT/OOC, 1 Thess. i. o. The sing. E//J-O-J is used collectively for eV/'^:is '"*• Gal. vi. 4, 1 Thess. i.:>, and else where. What is immediately afterwards expressed by eternal life., is here expressed by the three words, glory, honour, and immortality. The manifested excellence or splendour of the future condition of the saints is expressed by dbza; the honour due such excellence by rctirj; and the endless nature of their blessedness by dup&apaia.

VERSE 8. To those wlio are of contention, that is, the con tentious. Coinp. ol I/ rr^rsf-'c, believers; ol Ix -zfurotLy^, the circumcised; o> ~x dxpofi'jff-caz, the uncircumcised; ol Ix i/6/jio'j, those who belong to the law, legalists. Instead of the ordinary derivation of Irud-tia from £^c, Kuckert traces it to Ipc&oz, a hireling, which derivation is sustained by Tholuck, "Beitrage zur Spracherklarung dcs Neuen Testaments," p. 25, and Fritzsche, Excursus to his Commentary on the second chapter of this Epistle, and is now generally adopted. The signification of the word, as determined by its etymology and its classical usage is, work for lure, selfishness, ambition, party spirit, malice. In the New Testament it is used several times in the same sense, as in Philip, i. 10, ol /JLSV e~ iptd-sia^ some of rivalry, or malice; the antithetical expression is ol os e? ajd~r^. In Philip, ii. 8, it is connected with xsvodogla, vain glory. In James iii. 14, 16, it is connected with £"£/oc, envy. In 2 Cor. xii. 20, it is distin guished from sfttz. These passages show that the scriptural usage of the word agrees with the classical. Still in the present case it seems to have a somewhat wider meaning. It is not envy, or rivalry, but malicious opposition to God and his requirements that is here expressed. This is plain from the explanatory clauses that follow. The disposition expressed by epe&ela is manifested in disobeying the truth, and obeying unrighteousness. Brctsclmcider therefore explains ol ££ ipi- $£/«£ to mean qui malitia ducti Deo, i. e. rei divince, adversantur: "Those who through malice oppose themselves to God." The same interpretation is given by Reiche and De "Wette, as well as by the older commentators. Who obey not the truth. \-\xstd-sco is to refuse belief, to disbelieve, as well as to disobey. This clause therefore means, who refuse assent and obedience to the truth. *A):/jf}£ta is divine truth; what is true and right as to faith and practice. See i. 18. " Saepe," says Bengel, " haec duo (di)jrjd-£ta and ddr/la) inter se opponuntur: veritas continet justitiam, et injustitia connotat mendacium." Who yield them selves to, or follow unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, (shall be rendered.) The words &u/j.bc xal oof-rj should regularly be in the accusative, as depending on a~odcoazi of ver. 6; but as they are in the nominative, la-cat or a~od(oaerac must be supplied. There may be, as some suppose, force in the change of construction and omission of the verb. God gives eternal life; indignation and wrath come as earned by man, so to speak, Deo nolente. God wills all men to be saved. Comp. Rom. vi. 2-j. Both words are used for the sake of intensity. As to their specific difference, both ancient and modern philo- legists differ. The majority make d-uiibz express the momentary impulse of anger, otr^ the permanent feeling. Others make <3/>py to include the desire of vengeance, and therein to differ from &u[j.6z. The former distinction is more in accordance with the primary meaning of the words; as &'jrib- means the mind as the seat of the emotions, and hence is used for any strong passion, and on^r- means disposition, habit of mind.

VERSE (J. Tribulation and anguish; ^/.'/'.'C, (from /^//^w, to press,) means prt'smre, affliction; at&o%tooia, strait ness of place, anyuish. They are often associated; see chap. viii. 85, 2 Cor. vi. 4. The latter is the stronger of the two terms, as may be inferred from its always following the other, and espe cially from "2 Cor. iv. 8, fl-hftopsvot) "«//' 011 GTSKOfcopoufisvoe, troubled, but not <listr<w<L Ecenj smd />/' man, that is, every man. Comp. Acts ii. 41, Rom. xiii. 1, and the Hebrew »'c:-":3 t-a. Iviiekert, Meyer, and others, give c'"^ its full force, upon every soul that!>fi>n<i* t<> a man. to express the idea, that the soul and not the body is to suffer the penalty. Hut in xiii. 1. </";% evidently stands for the whole person: 'let every soul,' means let every person; and such is a common scriptural meaning of the word, "if a soul sin," "if a soul lie," l'if the priest buy a soul with his money,",Ve. Of tin-,/, /r //Vxf, and ahn of tin' Gri't'fc. It becomes now apparent that the apostle, in laying down these general principles of justice, had the Jews specially in view. (i,,d, be says, will render to every man according to his works; to the good, eternal life; to the evil, tribulation and anguish. And lest the every man should fail to arrest attention, lie adds expressly, that the Jew as well as the Greek is to be thus judged. The word -<>«)-(^ may express either order or preeminence. If the former, the sense is what is expressed by Calvin, kiJLiee universalis est divini judicii lex, •inne a Jmheis incipiet, et comprehendet totiim orbem." The judgment shall begin with the Jews, and extend to the Gen tiles. If the latter, the sense is, The Jew shall not only be punished as certainly as others, but more severely, because he has been more highly favoured. '-The Jew first," is equivalent then to the Jew especially. The same remark applies to the following verse. If the Jew is faithful, he shall be spe cially rewarded What is true of all men, is specially true of those to whom God has revealed himself in a peculiar manner.

VERSE 10. But glory, honour, and peace, to every one doing good; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. This verse com pletes the statement of the principle of law announced in ver. 6. The law, while it threatens death to the transgressor, promises life to the obedient; and it matters not in either case, whether it is a Jew or Gentile who receives its award. Glory, honour, and peace are descriptive terms for eternal life. It is a life glorious in itself, an object of reverence or regard to others, and a source of unspeakable blessedness or peace.

VERSE 11. For there is no respect of perso?zs with God. He is righteous and impartial, looking not at the person, but the conduct of those whom he judges. This is the ground of the assurance that he will judge Jews and Gentiles according to their works. The words TtpoactiTiotyfiia, ~(>oaa)-oArj~Tr^, xpoa- CO-O/^TTTSO), are all peculiar to the New Testament, and all owe their origin to the phrase xpoffco-ov lafifidvsw, which is used in the sense of the Hebrew phrase, fc^B as:, to lift up, or accept the face of any one, that is, to be favourable to him. This is sometimes used in a good sense, as Gen. xxxii. 21, "Peradventure he will accept of me," literally, lift up my face. Gen. xix. 21, Job xlii. 8. Most frequently in a bad sense, for par tiality. Hence judges are forbidden to accept the face of any one. Lev. xix. 15, Deut. x. 17. In the New Testament, all the expressions above mentioned are used in the sense of unjust partiality. All 7rpoaa)7tok/j</>ta, respect of persons, is denied to God, and forbidden to men. See Eph. vi. 9, Col. iii. 25, James ii. 1.

VERSE 12. In the preceding verse it was stated that God is just and impartial in all his judgments. This is confirmed not only by the previous assertion, that he will judge every man according to his works, but also by the exhibition of the impor tant principle contained in this verse. Men are to be judged by the light they have severally enjoyed. The ground of judg ment is their works; the rule of judgment is their knowledge. For as many as sinned without law. That is, God is impartial, for he will judge men according to the light which they have enjoyed. Our Lord teaches the same doctrine when he says,

"The servant which knew his lord's will,... shall be beaten with many stripes; but he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes." Luke xn. 47, 48. By law, is here meant a written or supernatural^ revealed law. In 1 Cor. ix. '21, the heathen are called fcoftw, without law, as distinguished from the Jews, who were u~o 1,0 1 toy, under law. Xotta^ as used by the apostle, means the rule of duty, the will of (Jod revealed for our obedience: com monly, however, with special reference to the revelation made in the Scriptures, \-hof tcu; is equivalent to yo)ol- yorwj, with out law, and is not to he taken in its moral sense, without restraint, i. e. recklessly. \hotw)~ xa: o-ohrr^u.^ shall a Into 2'">rixlt without law, that is. their punishment sliall be assigned without reference to the written law. AV/> before d-o/oDvra*, says Riickert and Tholuck, indicates the relation between I lie cause and effect, or premise and conclusion; or as Frit/sclio says, " ncccssitatem indicat, quit TO wttuo- u.-n'/jjjrrlhu ex TW dwfw)z &tmpi:dvztv consequatur." Neither of these explana tions seems to express the true fore-' of the particle: it rather serves to indicate that as the sinning is wmoz, so also is the punishment. \-l-vu>j/u is to destroy, to put to death, spoken of physical death, and also of eternal death. Matt. x. L'S. Luke iv. -U; and in the passive form. Luke xiii.:•). 5, -John iii. \.\ JiJ. 1 Cor. vin. 11. The word is strong in its own import;;lnd as explained by other passages, it here teaches that those who sin without a written revelation — although they are to be judged fairly, and are to be treated far less severely than those who have enjoyed the light of revelation— are still to perish. "Vide igitur, quale patrocinium suscipiant, <|ui pra»pn<teni misericordia gcntes evangel ii lumine privatas ignoranti;e pr;etextu Dei judicio eximcro tentant.'' Calkin.

VERSI-: I-0,. For not th<* hearers of th<> law. This verse is connected with the last clause of the preceding, and assigns the reason why the Jews shall be judged or punished according to the law: the mere possession or knowledge of the law would not avail, for it is not the hearers, but the doers of the law that are just before God. The expression hearers instead of readers, is explained by the fact that the law was read in the presence of the people, and bv hearing rather than by readiri"- their knowledge of it was obtained. Comp. Matt. v. 21, John xii. 34, Gal. iv. 21, James i. 22. To be just before God, and to be justified, are the same thing. They are both forensic expressions, and indicate the state rather than the character of those to whom they refer. Those are just in the sight of God, cr are justified, who have done what the law requires, and are regarded and treated accordingly; that is, are declared to be free from condemnation, and entitled to the favour of God. In obvious allusion to the opinion, that being a Jew was enough to secure admission to heaven, the apostle says, It is not the hearers but the doers of the law that are justified. He is not speaking of the method of justification available for sinners, as revealed in the gospel, but of the principles of justice which will be applied to all who look to the law for justification. If men rely on works, they must have works; they must be doers of the law; they must satisfy its demands, if they are to be justified by it. For God is just and impartial; he will, as a judge administering the law, judge every man, not according to his privileges, but according to his works and the knowledge of duty which he has possessed. On these principles, it is his very design to show that no flesh living can be justified.

VERSE 14. For whenever the G- entiles, not having the law. In the preceding verse the apostle had said, That not the hear ers but the doers of the law are justified before God; and then adds, For whenever the Gentiles, not having the law, do by nature the things of the law, they are a law unto themselves. But the fact that the Gentiles are a law unto themselves, has nothing to do, either as an illustration or confirmation, with the general proposition contained in ver. 13. Those who insist on establishing such a connection, suppose that ver. 14 refers to the last clause of ver. 13, and is designed to prove either that with regard to the Gentiles as well as Jews, doing is the thing required; or that there are doers of the law who may be justi fied, among the heathen. 'The doers of the law,' says the apostle, 'shall be justified; but the heathen do the law, there fore they shall be justified.' This, however, is not the con clusion at which the apostle is aiming. He is not teaching the method of justification, or arguing to prove that the Gentiles as well as the Jews may be doers of the law, and thus be justified in the sight of God. He is expounding the law; he is showing the principles by which God will judge the world, Gentiles as well as Jews. Those who are without the written law, he will judge without any reference to that law; and those who are under the law, he will judge by that law. This general pro position he confirms first by saying, in ver. 13, that the mere possession of the law is not enough; and secondly by saying, in ver. 14, that the Gentiles have a law by which they may be judged. The logical connection of ver. 14, therefore, is not with ver. 13, but witli ver. I'2. Thus Calvin, who says, u Pro-

bationera prioris membri (ver. 1-f) mine repetit. Probat enim frustra obtendi a gentibus ignorant iam, 41111111 factis suis declarent. nonnullam se liabere justiti:e regulam. Xulla enim gens uncjuani sic ab huinanitate abhorruit. ut non se infra leires ali([iias contineret." What, ivln'm-vt'i', as often ^x, wliicli may

be the sense of the particle in this case, 'Whenever, or as often as the heathen do so or so.' Or it nrny have the sense of a'/tilc, bc<'<iuxc: • Because, or since the heathen do so or so.' Conip. 1 Cor. xv. -7. As Zi+yrt is without the article, many would render it Jn'utlu')^ that is, s<t)n<> Ju'uthcn. But in the first place, it is evident from the context that this is not what the apostle means to say. 1 1 is object is to show that the heathen would have a rule of duty written on their hearts; a fact which is not proved by some heathen obeying the law, but which is proved by the moral conduct of all men. Men generally, not some men, but all men, show by their acts that they have a know-. ledge of right arid wrong. And secondly, this word has, with out the article, in virtue of its frequent occurrence, a definite sense, romp. iii. U, ix. l24, and especiallv ver. 30: l/(hrj... '/.fj'i/.'/.it dtyjuoa'jvr.v: tin' heathen attained righteousness. Do by nature the thin;/* of tin- Inir. There are two misinterpreta tions of the phrase, ~<L TO~J ^ono'j Tiotzlv. The one is, that it means to fulfil the law; the other, to do the office of the law, i. e. to command and forbid. The former is unnecessary, and is in direct opposition to the express and repeated declaration of the apostle, that ncnc, whether, Jew or Gentile, has ever fulfilled the law. To do the things of the law, is indeed to do what the law prescribes, (comp. x. 5, Gal. iii. 12;) but whether complete or partial obedience is intended, depends upon tho context. The man who pays his debts, honours hid parents, ig kind to the poor, does the things of the law; for these are things which the law prescribes. And this is all the argument the apostle requires, or his known doctrine allows us to under stand by the phrase, in the present instance. This being the case, there is no need of resorting to the second interpreta tion mentioned above, which was proposed by Beza, and adopted by Wetstein, Flatt, and others. Though /rorsZy ra roi) ^6/j.ou might mean to do what the law does, prescribe what is good and forbid what is evil, it certainly has not that sense elsewhere in Paul's writings, see x. 5, Gal. iii. 12; and is especially out of place here, in immediate connection with the phrase 7:oc^ral ro5 bbtioy, in the sense of doers of the law. The heathen do quase, by nature, the things of the law. The <pjocz of anything is the peculiarity of its being, that in virtue of which it is what it is; it is that which belongs to its original constitution, and is opposed to what is taught, acquired, or made. The word is sometimes used for a disposition or sentiment arising out of our nature, as opposed to mere arbitrary rules, as in 1 Cor. xi. 14. In the present case, the opposition is to UOJULO^. It is by nature, not by an external law, that the Gentiles are led to perform moral acts. Comp. Gal. iv. 8. Eph. ii. 3. The proper connec tion of c'jffzt with rd TOL> UO/JLOU xors;, they do by nature the tilings of the law, is retained in our version, and by the great majority of commentators. Bengel, R-uckert, and a few others, connect it with p.?] UOIJLOV lyo^ra, not having the law Inj nature; but this is saying very little to the purpose of the apostle. His object is to show that tp'jatz supplies to the Gentiles the place of W/JLOZ. These not having the law, are a law unto themselves. No/iov, without the article, maybe rendered either, a law, "not having a law," by implication, a written, external law; or the law, i. e. the Jewish law, since that word is often used without the article for the law of the Jews; that is, the law of God, as revealed in the Scriptures. The Gentiles, then, are law unto themselves; they have in their own nature a rule of duty; a knowledge of what is right, and a sense of obligation. As the absence of all moral acts among the lower animals shows that they have no sense of right and wrong, that they are not under a moral law, so the performance of such acts by the Gentiles, shows that they have a law written on their hearts.

VERSE 15. Who show the work of the law written or. their hearts. Here, as in i. 25, and often elsewhere, the relative has a causal force: 'They are a law unto themselves, because they show the work of the law,' &c. Wolf, Tholuck, and others make In-fw ~OL> uojuou a periphrase for the law itself; Grotius, the effect of the law, that is, a knowledge of right and wrong; most modern commentators make TO lo^oi> equivalent to rd io-fa. The same works which the Jews have prescribed in their law, the Gentiles show to be written on their hearts. It is by doing the things of the law, that the Gentiles show they have this inward rule of duty; their conscience aho learhnj icitiicw. Grotius, Koppe, and Tholuck, take a'jtitjLauT'jozlv in the sense Df the simple verb. Gump. Jer. xi. 7, in the LXX., Horn. ix. 1, viii. 1*J. -Their conscience bearing witness,' that is, to the fact that there is a law written on their hearts. ]>ut as a'jnnanr'j- />s?v is properly und textari, and as the context presents no reason for departing from the common meaning of the word, the great majority of commentators give the G'JV its proper force. That with which conscience joins its testimony is the honcstas vitiv, the moral acts of the heathen; and the fact to which this joint testimony is borne, is that they are a law unto themselves. The apostle appeals not only to their external conduct, but to the inward operations of their moral nature. — 'j^z.'.d/jrt^ is the <'<>nx<'it'nf/<i ro/ixetfuots, the inward jud^e, whose acts are described in the following clause: Their tl/<nt<jhtx (ilti-rniifi 1>{ (i<'i'u*in<i <>r even f'sruxiny. Our version takes n^a~'j as an adverb, and makes d/./.^/.aj^ the object of the following participles, 'And in the meanwhile, their thoughts accusing, or else excusing one another.' Kollner defends this interpreta tion, and declares that //sra£y, between, cannot mean viaissim. It is used, he asserts, only of time, between two portions of time, i. e. during; or of space, between two places, persons, or things. It is not, however, so much the signification of the word uzraZ'j, as the sense of the phrase /JLSTUZ'J dtiy/MV, that is expressed by the translation, vicissim, sive alternante sententid. * Between one another,' implies reciprocal or alten ate action; comp. Matt, xviii. 15. The order of the words is obviously opposed to the separation of aWfav from ^erc£u, and to making the former the object of the following participles; which are rather to be taken absolutely. Their thoughts alter nately accusing and excusing, viz. their conduct. The inward monitor acquits or condemns, as the case demands. Bcngcl remarks on the YJ xai, or even, that xal is concessive, and shows " cogitationes longe plus habere quod accusent, quam quod defendant."

VERSE 16. The greatest difficulty in relation to this verse is to determine its connection with the preceding context. In the common copies of our Bible, vs. 13, 14, 15, are marked as a parenthesis, and ver. 16 is placed in connection with ver. 12: 4 The heathen shall be judged without the lawT, and the Jews by the law, in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men.' Thus the passage is arranged by Griesbach and Knapp; a mode of connection adopted also by Beza, Grotius, Rciche, and others. The objections to this explanation are, first, the distance at which this verse stands from ver. 12; and secondly, that the intervening verses have not the nature of a parenthesis, but are intimately connected with the idea contained in ver. 12. Calvin, Bengel, lluckcrt, Fritzsche, De AVette, Meyer, Tholuck, &c., connect this verse >yUh ver. 15. The difficulty then is, that the verb and participles of ver. 15 are in the present tense, whereas xpevst of this verse is future: ' Their thoughts accusing or ex cusing in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men.' To meet this difficulty, Calvin proposes to give sv 'r^isfta the force of e<c ^,"«v, in the sense of until, or in reference to the day. Tholuck modifies this by making £y include e^, 'until and on that day.' Not only does conscience now exercise its office, but will do so especially on the day of judgment. Riickert, De Wette, and others, suppose that the apostle thought only of the present when he wrote ivdelxvuvrau, but extends the reference to the future, in the latter part of the verse. That is, the present participles express what will be present on the day of judgment: 'The heathen show the work of the law written on their hearts, and their conscience also bearing wit ness,' &c., on the day of judgment. But the main objection to this connection is, that the sense thus expressed is not suited to the apostle's object. He designs to prove that the Gentiles are a law to themselves. This is proved by the present operation of conscience, which approves or condemns their conduct. But it seems forced to bring that prcof from what conscience will do on the day of judgment. It seems best therefore to refer this verse back to ver. 12. God, it is said, will judge the secrets of men; the things which have escaped the knowledge of others; those hidden deeds of the heart and life, which are the surest criterion of character. The searching character of this judg ment; its justice, as not guided by mere external appearance; and its contrast with mere human judgments, are all intimated by this expression. The clause, accurdimj to my gospel, is not to be connected with y.outi, as though the gospel was to be the rule of this divine judgment; for this would contradict the apostle's doctrine, that men are to be judged by the light they possess. It refers to the fact of a final judgment, which is declared to be in accordance with the gospel, or a part of that message which Paul was commissioned to deliver. 7>// Jesus C/it'lxt is to be connected with xo'.^il. God will judge the world through Jesus Christ, agreeably to our Saviour's own declara tion, "The Father judgeth no man, but has committed all judg ment to the Son." Sometimes this judgment is referred directly to the Messiah, as in 1 Cor. iv. f>, '2 Cor. v. 10, '1 Tim. iv. 1; sometimes indirectly, as though he were but the representative of God, as in Acts xvii. ol. These representations, however, are perfectly consistent. The preposition md in such eases only expresses the idea that the power or authority which belongs to the Godhead is specially exercised through the Son. Thus sometimes it is said, God created all things through the Son, lleb. i. 2, and sometimes that the Son himself is the Creator, Col. i. 1G.

Such then are the principles on which Paul assures us that all men are to be judged. They commend themselves irresisti bly to every man's conscience as soon as they arc announced, and yet every false hope of heaven is founded on their denial or neglect. It may be proper to repeat them, that it may be seen how obviously the hopes of the Jews, to which Paul, from ver. IT onward, applies them, are at variance with these moral axioms. 1. lie who condemns in others what he does himself, ipso facto condemns himself. 2. God's judgments are according to the real character of men. 3. The goodness of God, being designed to lead us to repentance, is no proof that he will not punish sin. The perversion of that goodness will increase our guilt, and aggravate our condemnation. 4. God will judge every man according to his works, not according to his pro fessions, his ecclesiastical connections or relations. 5. Men shall be judged by the knowledge of duty which they severally possess. God is therefore perfectly impartial. These are the principles on which men are to be tried, in the last day, by Jesus Christ; and those who expect to be dealt with on any other plan, will be dreadfully disappointed.

1. The leading doctrine of this section is, that God is just. His judgments are infinitely removed above all those disturbing causes of ignorance and partiality, by which the decisions of men arc perverted, vs. 1, 16.

2. The refuge which men are always disposed to seek in their supposed advantages of ecclesiastical connection, as belonging to the true Church, &c., is a vain refuge. God deals with men according to their real character, vs. 2, 3.

3. The goodness of God has both the design and tendency to lead men to repentance. If it fails, the fault must be their own, ver. 4.

4. It is a great abuse of the divine goodness and forbearance to derive encouragement from them to continue in sin. Such conduct will certainly aggravate our condemnation, vs. 3 — 5.

5. None but the truly good, no matter what the professions, connections or expectations of others may be, will be saved; and none but the truly wicked, whether Gentile or Jew, Chris tian or heathen, will be lost, vs. 6 — 10.

6. The goodness which the Scriptures approve consists, in a great degree, in the pursuit of heavenly things: it is a seeking after glory, honour and immortality, by a persevering continu ance in well-doing. It is the pursuit of the true end of our being, by the proper means, ver. 7.

7. The 1 esponsibility of men being very different in this world, their rewards and punishment will, in all probability, be very different in the next. Those who knew not their Lord's will, shall be beaten with few stripes. And those who are faithful in the use of ten talents, shall be made rulers over ten cities, vs. 9, 10.

8. The heathen are not to be judged by a revelation of which they never heard. But as they enjoy a revelation of the divine character in the works of creation, chap. i. 19, 20, and of the rule of duty in their own hearts, vs. 14, 15, they are. inexcusa ble. They can no more abide the test by which they are to be tried, than we can stand the application of the severer rule by which we are to be judged. Both classes, therefore, need a Saviour, vcr. 12.

9. The moral sense is an original part of our constitution, and not the result of education, ver. 14.

10. Jesus Christ, who is to sit in judgment upon the secrets of all men, must be possessed of infinite knowledge, and there fore be divine, ver. 16.

1. The deceitfulness of the human heart is strikingly exhi bited in the different judgments which men pass upon them selves and others; condemning in others what they excuse in themselves. And it not unfrequently happens that the most censorious are the most criminal, vs. 1, 8.

2. How does the goodness of God affect us? If it docs not lead us to repentance, it will harden our hearts and af<Tavate

3. Genuine repentance is produced by discoveries of God's mercy, legal repentance by fear of his justice, ver. 4.

4. Any doctrine which tends to produce security in sin, must be false. The proper effect of the enjoyment of peculiar advan tages is to increase our sense of responsibility, and our grati tude to God, and not to make us suppose that we are his special favourites. God is no respecter of persons, vs. 3 — 10.

5. How vain the hopes of future blessedness, indulged by the immoral, founded upon the expectation cither that God will riot deal with them according to their works, or that the secrets of their hearts will not be discovered! vs. G — 10, 16.

6. If God is a just God, his wrath is not to be escaped by evasions, but in the way of his own appointment. If we have no righteousness of our own, we must seek that of the Saviour,

7. He who died for the sins of men is to sit in judgment upon sinners. This is a just ground of fear to those who reject his offered mercy, and of confidence to those who trust in his righteousness, ver. 16.

Tins section consists properly of two parts. The first, vs. IT — 24, contains an application of the principles laid down in the former section, to the case of the Jews. The second, vs. 25 — 29, is an exhibition of the nature and design of circum cision. The principal grounds of dependence on the part of the Jews were, 1. Their covenant relation to God. 2. Their supe rior advantages as to divine knowledge. 3. Their circumcision. Now if it is true that God will judge every man, Jew or Gentile, according to his works, and by the law which he has enjoyed, what will it avail any to say, We are Jews, we have the law, ver. IT; we have superior knowledge, ver. 18; we can act as guides and instructors to others? ver. 19. This may all be very true; but arc you less a thief, merely because you condemn stealing? less an adulterer, because you condemn adultery? or less a blasphemer, because you abhor sacrilege? vs. 21, 22. This superior knowledge, instead of extenuating, only aggra vates your guilt. While boasting of your advantages, you by your sins bring a reproach on God, vs. 23, 24. According to the first principles of justice, therefore, your condemnation will be no less certain, and far more severe than that of the Gentiles. As to circumcision, to which the Jews attached so much impor tance, the apostle shows that it could avail nothing, except on condition of obedience to the law or covenant to which it be longed, ver. 25. If the law be broken, circumcision is worth less, ver. 25, latter clause. On the other hand, if the law is obeyed, the want of circumcision will not prevent a blessing, vcr. 20. More than this, if those less favourably situated than the Jews are found obedient, they will rise up in judgment against the disobedient, though favoured people of God, vcr. 27. All this proves that an external rite can, in itself, have no saving power; because God is a Spirit, and requires and regards spiritual obedience alone. This principle is stated, first negatively, he is not a Jew who is such in profession merely, vcr. 28; and then affirmatively, he is a Jew who is one inwardly, ver. 29.