Commentary on Romans; Systematic Theology

VERSE 16. But they have not all obeyed the gospel, for Isaiah saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? This verse may be viewed as an objection to the apostle's doctrine, confirmed by the quotation of a passage from Isaiah. ' You say the gospel ought to be preached to all men, but if God had intended that it should be preached to them, they would obey it; which they have not done.' This view of the passage would have some plausibility if Calvin's representation of Paul's argument were correct. Did the apostle reason from the fact that the Gentiles believed that it was God's intention they should have the gospel preached to them, it would be very natural to object, that as only a few have obeyed, it was evidently not designed for them. But even on the supposition of the correctness of this view of the argument, this interpretation of vcr. 1G is barely possible, for the ((notation from Isaiah cannot be under stood otherwise than as the language of the apostle, or as intended to confirm what he himself had said. There is no necessity for the assumption that this verse is the language of an objection. Paul had said that the preaching of the gospel to all men, whether Jews or Gentiles, was according to the will of God. This is true aJtJiou</Ji (a/Mi) all have not obeyed. This disobedience was foreseen and predicted, for Isaiah saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? The complaint of the prophet was not confined to the men of his generation. It had reference mainly to the general rejection of the gospel, especi ally by the theocratical people. Christ came to his own, and his own received him not. And this was predicted of old. Our report, or message. The word is dxurr literally the faculty or act of hearing; then, metonymically, what is heard, i. e., a message, preaching, or teaching. The message of the prophet concerning the servant of the Lord, and what he was to do and stiller for his people, as recorded in Isa. liii., it was predicted would be believed by the great majority of those to whom it was addressed.

VERSE 17. So then faith (cometh) hy hearing, an'l hear hi ^ Inj the word <>f God. The passage in Isaiah speaks of an dxor^ a message, something addressed to the ear. The design of that message was that men should believe. They were required to receive and rest upon it as true. Without it, there could be no ground of faith; nothing on which faith could rest. There fore faith is from hearing. It is receiving the message as true. But this message is by the word or command of God. It is therefore a sure foundation of faith. And as all men are required to believe, the message should be sent to all, and the divine command on which it rests, must include an injunction to make the proclamation universal. Thus the two ideas pre sented in the context, viz., the necessity of knowledge to faith, and the purpose of God to extend that knowledge to the Gen tiles, are both confirmed in this verse. The above is the common interpretation of this passage. It assumes that p^/j.a BSOIJ is to be taken in the sense of command of God, whereas it commonly means the word or message of God. If this sense be retained here, then dxoy must mean the act of hearing. 4 Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing supposes something to be heard, a />^,u«, or word of God.' In Luke v. 5, Heb. xi. 3, (compare Hcb. i. 3,) pYj/jta 6sou means God's (or the Lord's) command. There is no necessity, therefore, for giving ay.oy a different sense here from that which it must have in the preceding verse.

VERSE 18. But I say,.Rave they not heard? Yes, verily, their sound went into all the earth, &c. The concise and abrupt mariner of argument and expression in this and the verses which precede and follow, renders the apostle's meaning some what doubtful. This verse is frequently considered as referring to the Jews, and designed to show that their want of faith could not be excused on the ground of wrant of knowledge. The sense of the passage would then be,;As faith cometh by hearing, have not the Jews heard? Have they not had the opportunity of believing? Yes, indeed, for the gospel has been proclaimed far and wide.' So Koppe, Flatt, Tholuck, Meyer, Philippi, &c. But there are several objections to this view of the passage. In the first place, it is not in harmony with the context. Paul is not speaking now of the rejection of the Jews, or the grounds of it, but of the calling of the Gentiles. 2. If the 16th verse refers to the Gentiles, "They have not all obeyed the gospel," and therefore this verse, "Have they not heard?" cannot, without any intimation of change, be naturally referred to a different subject. 3. In the following verse, where the Jews are really intended, they are distinctly mentioned, "Did not Israel know?"

Paul's object in the whole context is to vindicate the pro priety of extending the gospel call to all nations. This he had beautifully done in vs. 14, 15, by showing that preaching was a necessary means of accomplishing the clearly revealed will of God, that men of all nations should participate in his grace. 'True, indeed, as had been foretold, the merciful offers of the gospel were not universally accepted, ver. 16, but still faith cometh by hearing, and therefore the gospel should be widely preached," ver. 17. Well, has not this been done? has not the ano-el of mercy broke loose from his long confinement within the pale of the Jewish Church, and flown through the heavens with the proclamation of love?' ver. 18. This verse, therefore, is to be considered as a strong declaration that what Paul had proved ought to be done, had in fact been accomplished. The middle wall of partition had been broken down, the gospel of salvation, the religion of God, was free from its trammels, the offers of mercy were as wide and general as the proclamation of the heavens. This idea the apostle beautifully and appo sitely expresses in the sublime language of Psalm xix., "The heavens declare the glory of God, day unto day uttereth speech, there is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard, their line is £one through all the earth, arid their words to the end of the world." The last verse contains the words used by the apostle. His object in using the words of the Psalmist was, no doubt, to convey more clearly and alfectingly to the minds of his hearers the idea that the proclamation of the gospel was now as free from all national or ecclesiastical restrictions, as the instructions shed down upon all people by the heavens under which they dwell. Paul, of course, is not to be under stood as quoting the Psalmist as though the ancient prophet was speaking of the preaching of the gospel. He simply uses scriptural language to express his own ideas, as is done involun tarily almost by every preacher in every sermon.* It is, how ever, nevertheless true, as Hengstenberg remarks in his Christ-

ology, that "The universal revelation of God in nature, was a

* Calvin's view of this passage is peculiar— Quacrit, an Deus nunquam ante

gentes vocem suain.liroxit, ct doctoris officio functus sit crga totum mundum. — Accipio igitur ejus citatiunem in proprio et germano prophetae scnsu, ut tale sit argumentum: Deus jam ab initio mundi suam gentihus divinitatem mamfestaret, et si non hominum praedicatioue, creaturarum tamen suarum testimonio.— Apparet ergo, Duminum etiam pro eo tempore, quo foederis sui gra- *tiam in Israele continebat, non tamen ita sui notitiam gentibus subduxisse, quin aliquam semper illis scintillain accenderet.

providential prediction of the universal proclamation of the gospel. If the former was not fortuitous, but founded in the nature of God, so must the latter be. The manifestation of God in nature, is, for all his creatures to whom it is made, a pledge of their participation in the clearer and higher revelations."

It will be perceived that the apostle says, " Their sound has gone, £c.," whereas in the 19th Psalm it is, u Their line is gone." Paul follows the Septuagint, which, instead of giving the literal sense of the Hebrew word, gives correctly its figura tive meaning. The word signifies a line, then a musical cliord, and then, metonymically, sound.

VERSE 19. But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saitli, I iv ill provoke you to jealousy, &c. Another passage difficult from its conciseness. The difficulty is to ascertain what the question refers to. Did not Israel know what? The gospel? or, The calling of the Gentiles and their own rejection? The latter seems, for two reasons, the decidedly preferable interpretation. 1. The question is most naturally understood as referring to the main subject under discussion, which is, as frequently remarked, the calling of the Gentiles and rejection of the Jews. 2. The question is explained by the quotations which follow. ' Does not Israel know what Moses and Isaiah so plainly teach?' viz., that a people who were no people, should be preferred to Israel; while the latter were to be regarded as disobedient and gainsaying. According to the other interpretation, the meaning of the apostle is, ' Docs not Israel know the gospel? Have not the people of God been instructed? If, therefore, as wTas predicted, they are super, seded by the heathen, it must be their own fault.' Calvin thinks there is an evident contrast between this and the pre^ ceding verse. 4If even the heathen have had some knowledge of God, how is it with Israel, the favoured people of God? &c.' But this whole interpretation, as intimated above, is incon sistent with the drift of the context, and the spirit of the passages quoted from the Old Testament.

First Moses says, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, &c. The word first seems evidently to be used in reference to Isaiah, who is quoted afterward, and should not be connected, as it is by many, with Israel. 'Did not

Israel first learn the gospel? &c.' So Storr, Flatt, &c. Better in the ordinary way, 'First Moses, and then Isaiah, say, £c.' The passage quoted from Moses is Dout. xxxii. 21. In that chapter the sacred writer recounts the mercies of God, and the ingratitude and rebellion of the people. In ver. 21 lie warns them, that as they had provoked him to jealousy by that which is not God, he would provoke them to jealousy by them that are no people. That is, as they forsook him and made choice of another god, so he would reject them and make choice of another people. The passage, therefore, plainly enough inti mates that the Jews were in no such sense the people of God, as to interfere with their being cast off and others called.

VERSES 20, 21. Jiut Esaias /* wry loll, and saitJt, &c. That is, according to a very common Hebrew construction, in which one verb qualifies another adverbially, saitJt. very plainly or openly. Plain as the passage in Deuteronomy is, it is not so clear and pointed as that now referred to, Isaiah Ixv. 1, 2.

Paul follows the Septuagint version of the passage, merely transposing the clauses. The sense is accurately expressed. 'I am sought of them that asked not for me, I am found of them that sought me not,' is the literal version of the Hebrew, as given in our translation. The apostle quotes arid applies the passage in the sense in which it is to be interpreted in the ancient prophet. In the first verse of that chapter Isaiah says, that God will manifest himself to those uwho were not called by his name;" and in the second, he gives the immediate reason of this turning unto the Gentiles. k' I have stretched out my hand all the day to a rebellious people." This quotation, therefore, confirms both the great dm-trines taught in this chapter; the Jews were no longer the exclusive or peculiar people of God, and the blessings of the Messiah's kingdom were thrown wide open to all mankind. With regard to Israel, the language of God is peculiarly strong and tender. All day long I have stretched forth my hands. The stretching forth the hands is the gesture of invitation, and even supplication. God has extended wide his arms, and urged men frequently and long to return to his love; and it is only those who refuse, that he finally rejects.

1. Christianity is, from its nature, adapted to be an universal religion. There is nothing, as was the case with Judaism^ which binds it to a particular location, or confines it to a par ticular people. All its duties may be performed, and all its blessings enjoyed, in every part of the world, and by every nation under heaven, vs. 11 — 13.

2. The relation of men to God, and his to them, is not determined by any national or ecclesiastical connection. He deals with all, on the same general principles, and is ready to save all who call upon him, ver. 12.

3. WHOSOEVER will, may take of the water of life. The essential conditions of salvation have in every age been the same. Even under the Old Testament dispensation, God accepted all who sincerely invoked his name, ver. 13.

4. The preaching of the gospel is the great means of salva tion, and it is the will of God that it should be extended to all people, vs. 14, 15.

5. As invocation implies faith, and faith requires knowledge, and knowledge instruction, and instruction teachers, and teachers a mission, it is evident not only that God wills that teachers should be sent to all those whom he is willing to save, when they call upon him, but that all parts of this divinely connected chain of causes and effects are necessary to the end proposed, viz., the salvation of men. It is, therefore, as incumbent on those who have the power, to send the gospel abroad, as it is on those to whom it is sent, to receive it,

6. As the rudiments of the tree are in the seed, so all the elements of the New Testament doctrines are in the Old. The Christian dispensation is the explanation, fulfilment, and developement of the Jewish, vs. 11, 13, 15.

1. Christians should breathe the spirit of an universal religion. A religion which regards all men as brethren, which looks on God, not as the God of this nation, or of that church, but as the God and Father of all, which proposes to all the same conditions of acceptance, and which opens equally to all the same boundless and unsearchable blessings, vs. 11 — 13.

2. It must be very offensive to God, who looks on all men with equal favour, (except as moral conduct makes a difference,) to observe how one class of mortals looks down upon another, on account of some merely adventitious difference of rank, colour, external circumstances, or social or eccle-siastical con nection, vcr. 12.

3. How will the remembrance of the simplicity and reasona bleness of the plan of salvation, and the readiness of God to accept of all who call upon him, overwhelm those who perish from beneath the sound of the gospel! vcr. 13.

4. It is the first and most pressing duty of the church to cause all men to hear the gospel. The solemn question, implied in the lanu'uaire of the apostle, HOW CAN THEY BELIEVE WITH OUT A PREACHER? should sound day and night in the ears of the churches, vs. 14, 15.

5. "How can they preach except they be sent?" The failure of the whole must result from the failure of any one of the parts of the system of means. How long, alas! has the failure been in the very first step. Preachers have not been sent, and if not sent, how could men hear, believe, or call upon God? vs. 14, 15.

6. If u faith comes by hearing," how great is the value of astated ministry 1 llow obvious the duty to establish, sustain, and attend upon it! vcr. IT.

T. The gospel's want of success, or the fact that few believe our report, is only a reason for its wider extension. The more who hear, the more will be saved, even should it be but a small proportion of the whole, vcr. 10.

8. How delightful will be the time when literally the sound of the gospel shall be as extensively diffused as the declaration which the heavens, in their circuit, make of the glory of God!

9. The blessings of a covenant relation to God are the unalicnable right of no people and of no church, but can be pre served only by fidelity on the part of men to the covenant itself, ver. 19.

farthest from him, while he remains undiscovered by those who think themselves always in his presence, ver. 20.

11. God's dealings, even with reprobate sinners, are full of tenderness and compassion. All the day long he extends the arms of his mercy, even to the disobedient and the gainsaying. This will be felt and acknowledged at last by all who perish, to the glory of God's forbearance, and to their own confusion and self-condemnation, ver. 21.

12. Communities and individuals should beware how they slight the mercies of God, and especially how they turn a deaf ear to the invitations of the gospel. For when the blessings of a church relation have once been withdrawn from a people, they are long in being restored. Witness the Jewish and the fallen Christian churches. And when God ceases to urge on the disobedient sinner the offers of mercy, his destiny is sealed, v. 21.

THIS chapter consists of two parts, vs. 1—10, and 11—36. In the former the apostle teaches that the rejection of the Jews was not total. There was a remnant, and perhaps a much larger remnant than many might suppose, excepted, although the mass of the nation, agreeably to the predictions of the prophets, was cast off, vs. 1 — 10. In the latter, he shows that this rejection is not final. In the first place, the restoration of the Jews is a desirable and probable event, vs. 11 — 24. In the second, it is one which God has determined to bring to pass, vs. 25 — 32. The chapter closes with a sublime declaration of the unsearchable wisdom of God, manifested in all his dealings with men, vs. 33 — 36. In the consideration of the great doc trinal truths taught in this chapter, Paul intersperses many practical remarks, designed to give these truths their proper influence both on the Jews and Gentiles, especially the latter.

THE rejection of the Jews is not total, as is sufficiently mani fest from the example of the apostle himself, to say nothing of others, vcr. 1. God had reserved a remnant faithful to him self, as was the case in the times of Elias, vs. '2 — 4. That this remnant is saved, is a matter entirely of grace, vs. 5, 6. The real truth of the case is, that Israel, as a nation, is excluded from the kingdom of Christ, but the chosen ones are admitted to its blessings, ver. 7. This rejection of the greater part of the Jews, their own Scriptures had predicted, vs. 8 inferred from what I have said, that God hath rejected his people? When we consider how many promises are made to the Jewish nation, as God's peculiar people; and how often it is said, as in Psalm xciv. 14, u The Lord will not cast oft' his people," it is not surprising that the doctrine of the rejection of the Jews, as taught in the preceding chapters, was regarded as inconsistent with the word of G<>d. Paul removes this diffi culty, first by sli owing that the rejection of the Jews was neither total nor final; and secondly, by proving that the promises in question had reference, not to the Jewish nation as such, but to the elect, or, the spiritual Israel. The Word ebroW.ro stands at the beginning of the sentence, to show that it is emphatic. Has God utterly (i. e., totally and finally) rejected his people? This Paul denies. lie had not asserted any thing of the kind. The rejection of the Jews as a nation, was consistent with all that God had promised to their fathers. Those promises did not secure the salvation of all Jews, or of the Jews as a nation. And the doctrine which he had inculcated did not involve the rejection of all Jews. In proof, he adds, For I also am an Israelite. Paul had not taught his own rejection. The fact that he claimed for himself, and for all who with him believed on Christ, a part in the Messiah's kingdom, made it clear that he did not teach the rejection of all Israel. De Wette, and Meyer, in opposition to almost common consent, give a different view of the apostle's language. They understand him as repudiating the idea of the univer sal rejection of the Jews, as inconsistent with his patriotic feeling. For I also am an Israelite. How can a Jew believe that God has cast off his people? But the context is clearly in favour of the common interpretation. The apostle goes on to show that a general apostacy did not involve an entire rejec tion. The nation, as a nation, had before turned to idols, and yet a remnant had remained faithful. And so it was now. Of the seed of Abraham, and of the tribe of Benjamin, see Phil. iii. 5. Paul was a Jew by descent from Abraham, and not merely a proselyte; and he was of one of the most favoured tribes. Judah and Benjamin, especially after the exile, were the chief representatives of the theocratical people.

VERSE 2. G-od hath not cast away his people which he fore- Jcneio. This verse admits of two interpretations. The words Ms people, may be understood, as in the preceding verse, as meaning the Jewish nation, and the clause wMcli he foreknew, as, by implication, assigning the reason for the declaration that God had not cast them off. The clause, according to this view, is little more than a repetition of the sentiment of the preceding verse. ' It is not to be inferred from what I have said of the rejection of the Jews, that God has cast away all his chosen people. Multitudes are excepted now, as in the days of Elias.' The second interpretation requires more stress to be laid upon the words which he foreknew, as qualifying and distinguishing the preceding phrase, his people. * God has indeed rejected his external people, the Jewish nation as such, but he has not cast away his people whom he foreknew.' According to this view, Ms people means his elect, his spiritual people, or the true Israel. This interpretation seems decidedly preferable, 1. Be cause it is precisely the distinction which Paul had made, and made for the same purpose, in chap. ix. 6 — 8, * The rejection of the external Israel does not invalidate the promises of God, because those promises did not contemplate the natural seed as such, but the spiritual Israel. So, now, when I say that the external Israel is rejected, it does not imply that the true chosen Israel, to whom the promises pertained, is cast away.' 2. Be cause this is apparently Paul's own explanation in the sequel. The mass of the nation were cast away, but " a remnant, according to the election of grace," were reserved, vcr. 5. Israel, as such, Paul says in vcr. T, failed of admission to the Messiah's kingdom, "but the election hath obtained it." It is, therefore, evident that the people which Grod foreknew, and which were not cast off, is "the remnant" spoken of in vcr. 5, arid "the election" mentioned in vcr. 7. 3. Because the illus tration borrowed from the Old Testament best suits this inter pretation. In the days of Ellas, God rejected the great body of the people; but reserved to himself a remnant, chosen in sovereign grace. The distinction, therefore, in both cases, is between the external and the chosen people.

Which he foreknew. On the different senses of the word rendered he foreknew, see chap. viii. 21*. Compare Rom. vii. IT,, -2 Tim. ii. 1<>, 1 Cor. viii. 0, (ial. iv. <», Prov. xii. 10, Ps. ci. 4, 1 Thess. v. 12,.Matt. vii. 32. In foreknowledge, as thus used, is involved something more than simple prescience, of which all persons and all events are the objects. The people whom God foreknew, were a people distinguished by that foreknowledge from all other people. All are not Israel who are of Israel. 0<>d knows those who are his, and in the midst of general apostacy. preserves and saves those whom he thus foreknows as his own. Even Luther gives this view of

the passage. w'Es ist nicht alles Gottes volk, was Gottes volk lieisset; darum win! nicht alles verstossen, ob der mchero Theil auch verstossen wird." And Olshausen says, t%Y<>m sichtbaren geht er aber welter, auf den unsichtbaren Kern des volkes Gottes iiber.... Offenbar kann Pa-ulns liier nicht von bloss die YAH' Kirchc ubergetretenen Juden /neinen, die waren kenntlich, sondern die jedem menschlichen Auge unbekannten, die den verborgencn Schatz der Treue und Aufrichtigkcit ibnen selbct unbewusst im Ilerzen trugen. Diese vcrhalten sich zur Masse des Yolks, wie im Individuum die Rcste des gottlichen Eberibildes zum alten Menschen; odcr wie im wiedergebornen der unentwickelte, oft von der Slinde zuriickgcdrangte neue Merisch zu dein ilim um^ebenden sundlichen Menschen. "\Vie

dicser stcrbcn muss, damit jener herrsche, so muss auch daa hljJLfjia frci gemacht werden von der frcmden Schale, in der er wohnt, urn sich ausbreiten zu kbnncn. Imrner 1st es das eigentliche Volk (9, 6 if.) auf das alle Verheisungen gehen, wie der unsclicinbaro neue Mensch in dem ungeschlachtigen alien Menschen allcin der wahre Mensch 1st."

Wot ye not what the Scripture saith of Elias? ev '////#, in Elias, i. c., in the section which treats of Ellas, or which is designated by his name. Another example of this method of referring to Scripture is found in Mark xii. 26, "In the bush God spake unto him;'' i. e., in the section which treats of the burning bush. This method of quotation is common with the Rabbins, Surenh. p. 493, and occurs in the classic writers. How lie maJccth intercession to Crod against Israel; evTUf- %dv£ev means to approach or draw near to any one, either bnep, in behalf of, or xu~d, against. The latter form occurs here and in 1 Mace. x. 60.

VERSE 3. Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged doiun thine altars, and I am left alone, &c. 1 Kings xix. 10. Paul gives the sense, and nearly the words of the original. The event referred to was the great defection from the true religion, and the murder of the prophets of God, under the reign of Ahab. The point of the analogy to which the apostle refers, is, that although then, as now, the defection was apparently entire, yet many unknown of men remained faithful, and escaped the doom visited on the nation as such. As the law allowed only one altar, and that at Jerusalem, it has been asked, How the prophet could speak of digging down the altars of God, as though there were many? To this it is commonly answered, that the probability is, that after the defection of the ten tribes, many altars to the true God were erected in secret places, by those who adhered to the religion of their fathers, and which, as access to Jerusalem was impossible, were then tolerated by the prophets, and the destruction of which, out of hatred to the true religion, was evidence of apostacy from God.

VERSE 4. But what saith the answer of Grod unto him f I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, &c. 1 Kings xix. 18. Here again the apostle gives the sense of the original, with slight variations both from the Hebrew and Greek. In the LXX., the future xarah'upw is used where Paul has the aorist, xa-ih-Tov. Paul also inserts the pronoun (k/2aoT<p\ which is neither in the Greek nor Hebrew. "I have reserved for myself;" i. e., as my own peculiar people. In Kings, God threatens the general destruction of the people, but promises to reserve seven thousand, who had not gone after false gods. No special stress is to be laid on the number seven, as the whole design of the apostle is to show that national destruction does not involve the destruction of the true people of God. He always has an invisible church within the visible; and the destruction or dispersion of the latter does not affect the for mer. Answer of God yj^tia-iaub^ divine response, or oracle. The verb %I"''/?M~ '-"<'> occurs in Ileb. xii. -5, xi. 7. Matt Luke ii. 2<>, Arts x. —. Those who remained faithful in the time of Elias. were those who had not bowed the knee to Baal. Baal signifies lord, ruler, and is used as the designation of a. Phoenician deity. Among the Chaldeans he was called Bel, or Belus. He was regarded as the generative, controlling princi ple, of which the sun or the planet of Jupiter was the symbol, and to the people the direct object of worship. With him was associated a female deity, AsJttarotJt, the Greek Astarte, called queen of heaven, the moon. But as Baal was also associated with the planet Jupiter, so was Ashtaroth with Venus. In thii passage the feminine article is used before Baal, 77} HdaL This is explained by our interpreters, by supposing that e/xoV, image, is omitted. 'lUit this is unsatisfactory, not only because if such ellipsis occurred, the expression would properly be, TTJ roi) Hard: but also because in the LXX. and the Apocrypha, Baal has repeatedly the feminine article. Zeph. i. 4, IIos. 11. 8, 1 Sam. vii. 4. Some say this is done in the way of contempt, as with the Rabbins the feminine form is sometimes thus used. There is, however, no special indication of any such purpose in those cases where the feminine article occurs. It is more satis factory to asume that, at least with the later Hebrews, both the active generative principle in nature, and the passive, or birthgiving principle, was expressed by the same word; so that Baal was really androgyne, both male and female.

VERSE 5. Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. As in the days of Elias, there was a number which, although small in comparison with the whole nation, was still much greater than appeared to human eyes who remained faithful, so at the present time, amidst the general defection of the Jews, and their consequent rejection as a people, there is a remnant, (h'c/n/jta, what is left, answering to XUTSACTZOU in ver. 4,) according to the election of grace; that is, graciously chosen. The election was gracious, not merely in the sense of kind, but gratuitous, sovereign, riot founded on the merits of the persons chosen, but the good pleasure of God. This explanation of the term is given by the apostle himself in the next verse. Remnant according to the gracious election is equivalent to remnant gratuitously chosen; see chap. ix. 11, and vs. 21, 24 of this chapter. Paul, there fore, designs to teach that the rejection of the Jews was not total, because there was a number whom God had chosen, who remained faithful, and constituted the true Israel or elected people, to whom the promises were made. As in the days of Elias, the number of those who had not bowed the knee to Baal was far greater than the prophet believed it to be, so the number of those who acknowledged Christ as the Messiah, in the times of the apostle, was much larger probably than is generally supposed. The apostle James speaks of many myriads (TLOCKU pjocddzz), Acts xxi. 20, of believing Jews.

VERSE 6. And if by grace, then it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace. This verse is an exegctical comment on the last clause of the preceding one. If the elec tion spoken of be of grace, it is not founded on wrorks, for the two things are incompatible. It evidently wras, in the apostle's view, a matter of importance that the entire freeness of the election of men to the enjoyment of the blessings of the Mes siah's kingdom, should be steadily kept in view. He would not otherwise have stopped in the midst of his discourse to insist so much on this idea. This verse serves to illustrate several declarations of the apostle in the preceding chapter. For example, ver. 11, in which, as here, men are said to be chosen in a sovereign manner, and not according to their works. It is obvious that foreseen works are as much excluded as any other. For a choice founded upon the foresight of good works, is as really made on account of works as any choice can be, and, consequently, is not of grace, in the sense asserted by the apostle. In the second place, the choice which is here declared to be so entirely gratuitous, is a choice to the kingdom of Christ. This is evident from the whole context, and espe cially from vcr. 7. It was from this kingdom and all its spirit ual and eternal blessings that the Jews, as a bodv, were reject ed, arid to which "the remnant according to the election of grace" was admitted. The election, therefore, spoken of in the ninth chapter, is not to external privileges merely.

The latter part of this verse is simply the converse of the former. But if of works, then it in no more grace; othenvisc work is no more work. If founded on any tiling in us, it is not founded on the mere good pleasure of God. If the one be affirmed, the other is denied. This clause is omitted in the uncial MSS. A. C. D. K. F. G.. and in several of the ancient versions, and by all the Latin fathers. On these grounds it is rejected as a gloss by Erasmus, Grotius, AVctstein, Griesbach, and the later editors. It is found, however, in the MS. B., and in the Syriac version, both of which are important author ities, and is retained by.He /a and Hengcl, and defended by Fritzsehe, Tholuck, and others. The internal evidence, and a comparison with similar passages, as Rom. iv. 4, Eph. ii. 8, 9, are in its favour.

AVERSE 7. Wliat then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for: hut the election hath obtained it, &c. tiee/ceth, l~c*7tTs.1 expresses earnest seeking, and the use of the present tense indicates the persistency of the search. The Jews zeal ous and perseveringly sought after righteousness. They failed, however, as the apostle says, because they sought it by works. This verse is by many pointed differently, and read thus, "What then? Hath not Israel obtained that which he seek eth for? nay, but the election have," &c. The sense is not materially different. The apostle evidently designs to state the result of all he had just been saying. Israel, as a body, have not attained the blessing which they sought, but the chosen portion of them have. The rejection, therefore, is not total, and the promises of God made of old to Israel, which contemplated his spiritual people, have not been broken. It is clear, from the whole discourse, that the blessing sought by the Jews was justification, acceptance with God, and admission into his kingdom; see chap. x. 3, ix. 30, 31. This it is which they failed to attain, and to which the election were admitted. It was not, therefore, external advantages merely which the apostle had in view. The election means those elected; as the circumcision means those who are circumcised. The election, i. c., reliquiae ejus populi, quas per gratiam suam Dens eligit.

And the rest were blinded. The verb (ino)po)drjaav) rendered were blinded, properly means in its ground form, to harden, to render insensible, and is so translated in our version, Mark vi. 52, viii. IT, John xii. 40. In 2 Cor. iii. 14, the only other place in which it occurs in the New Testament, it is rendered as it is here. It is used in reference to the eyes in the Septuagint, Job xvii. 7, "My eyes are dim by reason of sorrow." Either rendering, therefore, is admissible, though the former is pre ferable, as more in accordance with the usual meaning of the word, and with Paul's language in the previous chapters. And the rest were hardened, that is, were insensible to the truth and excellence of the gospel, and, therefore, disregarded its offers and its claims. This xwftcowz affected the understanding as well as the heart. It was both blindness and obduracy. The passive form here used, may express simply the idea that they became hard, or the reference may be to the judicial act of God, see ix. 18. They were hardened by God, i. e., abandoned by him to the hardness of their own hearts.

VERSE 8. According as it is ivritten, Crod hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, ears that they should not hear. This passage, as is the case with ix. 33, is composed of several passages found in the Old Testament. In Isa. vi. 9, it is said, "Hear ye indeed, but understand not; see ye indeed, but perceive not:" ver. 10, "Lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears." Deut. xxix. 4, "Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day." Isa. xxix. 10, "For the Lord hath poured upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes." The spirit, and to some extent, the language of these passages, Paul cites in support of his argument. They are in part descriptive of what had occurred in the times of the prophets, and in part prophetic of what should hereafter occur, and are therefore applicable to the character and conduct of the Jews during the apostolic age. See Matt. xiii., xiv. The design of such citations frequently is to show that what was fulfilled partially in former times, was more per fectly accomplished at a subsequent period. The Jews had often before been hardened, but at no former period were the people so blinded, hardened, and reprobate, as when they rejected the Son of God, and put him to an open shame. It had often been predicted that such should be their state when the Messiah came. The punitive character of the evils here threatened, cannot escape the reader's notice. This blindness and hardness were not mere calamities, nor were they simply the natural effects of the sins of the people. They were puni tive inflictions. They are SO denounced. God says, 1 will give you eves that see not. Jt is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. The strokes uf his justice blind, bewilder, and harden the soul. The words even unto this day, mav, as hv our translators, be connected with the last words of the preceding verse, ' The rest were blinded even unto this day.' Or they may be considered as a part of the quotation, as they occur in Deut. xxix. 4.

VERSES!», in. And I>avid saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, &c. This Psalm (Ixix.) is referred to David in the heading prefixed to it, and the propriety of the reference to him as its author is confirmed both by external and internal evidence. See ITengstenb erg's Commentary on tlie Psalms. No portion of the Old Testament Scriptures is more frequently referred to, as descriptive of our Lord's sufferings, than the Psalms Ixix. and xxii. There is nothing in this Psalm which forbids its being considered as a prophetic lamentation of the Messiah over his afflictions, and a denunciation of God's judg ments upon his enemies. Arerse 0, "The zeal of thy house hath eaten me up," and ver. 21, u They gave me vinegar to drink," are elsewhere quoted and applied to Christ. Viewed in this light, the Psalm is directly applicable to the apostle's object, as it contains a prediction of the judgments which should befall the enemies of Christ. Let their table be, is only another and a more forcible way of saying, their table shall be. Isa, xlvii. 5, u Sit thou silent, and get thee into darkness, 0 daughter of the Chaldeans," for 'Thou shalt sit, &c/ And so in a multitude of cases in the prophetic writings. In the Psalm, indeed, the future form in the Hebrew is used, though it is correctly rendered by the Septuagint and in our version as the imperative, in these passages. The judgments here de nounced are expressed in figurative language. The sense is, their blessings shall become a curse; blindness and weakness, hardness of heart and misery shall come upon them. This last idea is forcibly expressed by a reference to the dimness of vision, and decrepitude of old age; as the vigour and activity of youth are the common figure for expressing the results of God's favour.

Even if the Psalm here quoted be considered as referring to the sorrows and the enemies of the sacred writer himself, and not to those of Christ, it would still be pertinent to the apostle's object. The enemies of the Psalmist were the enemies of God; the evils imprecated upon them were impre cated on them as such, and not as enemies of the writer. These denunciations are not the expression of the desire of private revenge, but of the just and certain judgments of God. And as the Psalmist declared how the enemies of God should be treated, how dim their eyes should become, and how their strength should be broken, so, Paul says, it actually occurs. David said, let them be so treated, and we find them, says the apostle, suffering these very judgments. Paul, therefore, in teaching that the great body of the Jews, the rejectors and crucifiers of the Son of God, were blinded arid cast away, taught nothing more than had already been experienced in various portions of their history, and predicted in their prophets.

1. The gifts and calling of God are without repentance. The people whom God had chosen for himself, he preserved amidst the general defection of their countrymen, vs. 1, 2.

2. The apparent apostacy of a church or community from God, is not a certain test of the character of all the individuals of which it may be composed. In the midst of idolatrous

Israel, there were many who had not bowed the knee unto Baal. Denunciations, therefore, should not be made too general, vs. 2 — 4.

3. The fidelity of men in times of general declension is not to be ascribed to themselves, but to the grace of God. Every remnant of faithful men, is a remnant according to the election of grace. That is, they are faithful, because graciously elected,

4. Election is not founded on works, nor on any thing in its objects, but on the sovereign pleasure of God; and it is not to church privileges merely, but to all the blessings of Christ's kingdom, vs. U, T.

5. It is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth. Israel, with all their zeal for the attainment of salvation, were not successful, while those whom God had chosen attained the blessing, ver. 7.

(j. Those who forsake God, are forsaken by God. In leaving him, they leave the source of light, feeling, and happi ness, ver. 7.

7. AVhen men are forsaken of God all their powers are use less, and all their blessings become curses. Having eyes, they see not, and their table is a snare, vs. 8 — 10.

1. As in the times of the greatest defection, there are some who remain faithful, and as in the midst of apparently apostate communities, there arc some who retain their integrity, we should never despair of the church, nor be too ready to make intercession against Israel. The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his,

2. Those only are safe whom the Lord keeps. Those who do not bow the knee to Baal, arc a remnant according to the election of grace, and not according to the firmness of their own purposes, vs. 5, 6.

3. All seeking after salvation is worse than useless, unless properly directed. Those who are endeavouring to work out a righteousness of their own, or to secure the favour of God in any way by their own doings, are beating the air. Success is to be obtained only by submission to the righteousness of God,

4. As the fact that any attain the blessing of God is to bo attributed to their election, there is no room for self-compla cency or pride; and where these feelings exist and are cher ished in reference to this subject, they are evidence that we are not of the number of God's chosen, ver. 7.

5. Men should feel and acknowledge that they arc- in the hands of God; that, as sinners, they have forfeited all claim to his favour, and lost the power to obtain it. To act perseveringly as though either of these truths were not so, is to set our selves in opposition to God and his plan of mercy, and is the very course to provoke him to send on us the spirit of slumber. This is precisely what the Jews did, vs. 7, 8.

6. Men are commonly ruined by the things in which they put their trust or take most delight, The whole Mosaic system, with its rites and ceremonies, was the ground of confidence and boasting to the Jews, and it was the cause of their destruc tion. So, in our day, those who take refuge in some ecclesias tical organization instead of Christ, will find what they ex pected would prove their salvation, to be their ruin. So, too, all misimproved or perverted blessings are made the severest curses, vs*. 9, 10.

As the rejection of the Jews was not total, so neither is it final. They have not so fallen as to be hopelessly prostrated. First, God did not design to cast away his people entirely, but, by their rejection, in the first place, to facilitate the progress of the gospel among the Gentiles, and ultimately to make the con version of the Gentiles the means of converting the Jews, ver. 11. The latter event is in itself desirable and probable. 1. Because if the rejection of the Jews has been a source of blessing, much more will their restoration be the means of good, vs. 12, 15. (The verses 13, 14, are a passing remark on the motive which influenced the apostle in preaching to the Gentiles.) 2. Because it was included and contemplated in the original election of the Jewish nation. If the root be holy, so are the branches, ver. 16.

The breaking off and rejection of some of the original branches, and the introduction of others of a different origin, is not inconsistent with this doctrine; and should lead the Gen tiles to exercise humility and fear, and not boasting or exulta tion, vs. 17—22. As the rejection of the Jews was a punish ment of their unbelief, and not the expression of God's ultimate purpose respecting them, it is, as intimated in ver. 16, more probable that God should restore the Jews, than that he should have called the Gentiles, vs. 23, 24.

This event, thus desirable and probable, God has determined to accomplish, vs. 25, 26. The restoration of the Jews to the privileges of God's people is included in the ancient predictions and promises made respecting them, vs. 26, 27. Though now, therefore, they are treated as enemies, they shall hereafter be treated as friends, ver. 28. For the purposes of God do not alter; as his covenant contemplated the restoration of his ancient people, that event cannot fail to come to pass, ver. 29. The plan of God, therefore, contemplated the calling of the Gentiles, the temporary rejection and final restoration of the Jews, vs. 30 — 32.

How adorable the wisdom of God manifested in the plan and conduct of the work of redemption! Of him. through him, and to him, are all things; to whom be glory for ever. Amen. YS. 33—36.

VERSE 11. I say then, Hare they stiunlM that they should fall? God forlid, &c. This verse begins with the same formula as the first verse of the chapter, and for the same reason. As there the apostle wished to have it understood that the rejection of God's ancient people was not entire, so here he teaches that this rejection is not final. That this is the mean ing of the verse seems evident, 1. From the comparative force of the words stumble and/aH. As the latter is a much stronger term than the former, it seems plain that Paul designed it should here be taken emphatically, as expressing irrevocable ruin, in opposition to that which is temporary. The Jews have stumbled, but they are not prostrated. 2. From the context; all that follows being designed to prove that the fall of the Jews was not final. This is indeed intimated in this very verse, in which it is implied that the conversion of the Gentiles would lead to the ultimate conversion of the Jews. The word (Trea-wa-w) rendered should fall, is used here as elsewhere to mean, should perish, become miserable, Ilcb. iv. 11. The particle iva, that, here as usually, expresses design. Have the Jews stumbled, in order that they should fall? There are two views, however, as to the meaning of the passage. The first is that just men tioned, Was it the design of God, in permitting the stumbling of the Jews, that they should finally perish? In other words, Was their rejection designed to be a permanent casting them out of the kingdom of Christ? This view is sustained by the whole subsequent discussion, in which the apostle proves that the Jews, as a nation, are to be converted. The other inter pretation assumes that the apostle means to say, that the design of God in the rejection of the Jews, was not so much their punishment, as to facilitate the calling of the Gentiles. ' Has God caused or allowed them to stumble, for the sake of punishing them, or simply that they should fall? By no means, but,' &c. This interpretation, although it is suited to the verse, considered separately, is not so agreeable to the context, and the design of the apostle. It is not his object in what follows, to prove that God had not cast off his people for the simple purpose of causing them to suffer, but to show that their rejec tion was not final.

But through their fall salvation has come unto the Crentiles. The stumbling of the Jews was not attended with the result of their utter and final ruin, but was the occasion of facilitating the progress of the gospel among the Gentiles. It was, therethere, not designed to lead to the former, but to the latter result. From this very design it is probable that they shall be finally restored, because the natural effect of the conversion of the Gentiles is to provoke the emulation of the Jews. That the rejection of the gospel on the part of the Jews was the means of its wider and more rapid spread among the Gentiles, seems to clearly intimated in several passages of the New

Testament. "It was necessary," Paul says to the Jews, "that the word of God should first have been spoken to you; but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles." Acts xiii. 46. And in Acts xxviii. 28, after saying that the prophecy of Isaiah was fulfilled in their unbelief, he adds, "Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto them." Compare Isa. xlix. 4 — 6. The Jews, even those who were professors of Christianity, were, in the first place, very slow to allow the gospel to be preached to the Gentiles; and in the second, they appear almost uniformly to have desired to clog the gospel with the ceremonial observances of the law. This was one of the greatest hinderances to the progress of the cause of Christ during the apostolic age, and would, in all human probability, have been a thousand-fold greater, had the Jews, as a nation, embraced the Christian faith. On both these accounts, the rejection of the -Jews was incidentally a means of facilitating the progress of the gospel. Besides this, the punishment which befell them on account of their unbelief, involving the destruc tion of their nation and pn\ver, of course prevented their being able to forbid the general preaching of the gospel, which they earnestlv desired to do. 1 Thess. ii. 1.5, 16, "They please not God, and are contrary to all men; forbidding us to preach to the Gentiles, that they might be saved."

For to provoke them to jealousy. As the result and design of the rejection of the Jews was the salvation of the Gentiles, so the conversion of the latter was designed to bring about the restoration of the former. The Gentiles are saved in order to provoke the Jews to jealousy. That is, this is one of the many benevolent purposes which God designed to accomplish by that event. This last clause serves to explain the meaning of the apostle in the former part of the verse. lie shows that the rejection of the Jews was not intended to result in their being finally cast away, but to secure the more rapid progress of the gospel among the heathen, in order that their conversion might react upon the Jews, and be the means of bringing all, at last, within the fold of the Redeemer. To provoke to jealousy, xaoa^hoffae, to excite emulation; i. e., to stimulate to follow. The word is not to be taken in a bad sense, notwithstanding the napd. All the apostle intended to saj was, that he hoped the conversion of the Gentiles would be the means of excitino-

VERSE 12. Now, if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the G-entiles, how much more their fulness? Although there is considerable diffi culty in fixing the precise sense of the several clauses of this verse, its general meaning seems sufficiently obvious. i If the rejection of the Jews has been the occasion of so much good to the world, how much more may be expected from their restora tion?' In this view it bears directly upon the apostle's object, which, in the first place, is to show that the restoration of the Jews is a probable and desirable event. There is in the verse a two-fold annunciation of the same idea. In the first, the sen tence is incomplete. l If the fall of them be the riches of the world, lioiv much more their recovery? if their diminishing, how much more their fulness?' The principal difficulty in this pas sage results from the ambiguity of the words (ft-T^ua and TJcffOcowL] rendered diminishing and fulness. The former may mean fewness or inferiority, a condition worse than that of others, or ^oorse than a former one. Those who adopt the former of these senses, understand the verse thus: ' If the few Jews, who have been converted, have been such an advantage to the Gentiles, how much more will the great multitude of them, when brought to Christ, be a source of blessing.' But to this interpretation it may be objected, 1. The word has rarely, if ever, the meaning here assigned to it. Passow gives it no such signification in his Lexicon. The cognate verb sig nifies, I am inferior in strength or condition to any one. 2 Peter ii. 19, 2 Cor. xii. 13. The adjective means inferior, ivorse: 1 Cor. xi. 17, "Ye come together not for the better, but for the worse." The only place in which the word here used occurs elsewhere in the New Testament, is 1 Cor. vi. 7, " There is utterly a fault among you," or as it might be rendered, 'It is an injury to you.' Such too is the meaning of the word in the Old Testament: Isa. xxxi. 8, "His young men shall be discomfitted," which expresses the sense of the original; and so does the Septuagint, which employs the word used by the apostle, 4 His young men shall be brought into an inferior condition,' i. e., shall be conquered. 2. This interpretation does not suit the context. Paul does not say that the conversion of the few Jews who had become Christians, had been the occa sion of good to the Gentiles, but the rejection of the great body of the nation. 8. It does not at all suit the first clause of the verse. The fall of them, answers to and explains the diminish ing of them. As the former clause cannot receive the interpre tation objected to, neither can the latter. Tholuck and others take '/j'T^aa in a moral sense; their fault, so as to correspond with -(J.od.-'totm. But this would make the two clauses of the verse tautological, and destroy the antithesis between /,'rr^tf and -j.r'jfttotLfJ., as the latter cannot mean, their goodness. The sense is clear and good if we give 7^-r^ia its natural meaning; their wor^ estate, or /oxx. The.lews lost their peculiar privile<res and blessings, and their loss was the riches of the Gen tiles. It enriched them by being the means of transferring to them the treasures of the gospel.

The word ~/j oon.fj. has various senses in the New Testament. It properly means that wltli irhi<-h anything /* Jillf<L as in tho frequent phrase, th<' fulnexs of tin' earth, or of the,s<v/, &c. So fulness of the (foiUica<L all that is in God, the plenitude of Deity. John i. ID, "Of his fulness have all we received;" Eph. iii.!•*, "That ye might be filled with all the fulness of God." It also means the complement or supplement of any thing, the rematni/Kj part: see Matt. ix. U>. So in Kph. i. 33, the church may be called the fulnrss of Christ, because lie is the head, the church the residue, or complement, by which tho mystical body is completed. Of these several meanings, Storr selects the last, and explains the verse thus: i If the ruin of the unbelieving Jews has been a source of blessing to the Gen tiles, how much more shall the remaining portion of the nation, i. e., those converted to Christianity, be the means of good.' But, 1. This interpretation destroys the obvious antithesis of the sentence; "the remaining part" docs not answer to the word rendered ruin, as it obviously should do. 2. It is not m accordance with the context, which is not designed so much to set forth the usefulness of the Jews then converted, as to declare the blessings likely to be consequent on the final con version of the whole nation. 3. A comparison of this, with the

15th verse, is unfavourable to this interpretation. These verses evidently express the same idea, and therefore illustrate each other. ' If the casting away of them be the occasion of recon ciling the world, what will the receiving of them be?' &c. Vcr. 15. Retaining the sense, complement, the passage admits of a different interpretation from that given by Storr. The Jewish nation are the ntyrxoti.^ the complement, that which completes the whole number of the people of God. A rent, or loss had occurred by their rejection; they were, however, the complement by which that loss was to be made good. This is evidently forced.

The common interpretation, therefore, is to be preferred: 'If the injury or ruin of the Jews has been the occasion of good to the Gentiles, how much more shall their full restoration or blessedness be?' 1. This agrees with the antithesis, 'If the fall, then the recovery; if the ruin, then the blessedness,' &c. 2. It suits the context, and the design of the apostle. 3. It is in strict accordance with the obviously parallel passage in the 15th verse, just quoted. The remark of Thomas Aquinas is of great weight: " Bonum cst potentius ad utilitatem inferendam, quam inalum, sed raalum Judrerorum gentilibus magnam utilitatem contulit, ergo multo majorem confert mundo eorum bonum." The xtypaifjia of the Gentiles is, therefore, that which fills them, and renders their blessedness full. The word is thus retained in its ordinary sense.

VERSE 13. For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle to the G- entiles. This and the following verse con tain a transient remark relating to the apostle's own feelings and mode of acting in reference to the subject in hand. Ilis readers were not to suppose, that because he was the apostle to the Gentiles, his labours had no reference to the Jews, or that he was unconcerned about their salvation. This passage is therefore connected with the last clause of the preceding verse, in which Paul had said that the conversion of the Gentiles was adapted and designed to bring about the restoration of the Jews. These two events, instead of being at all inconsistent, were intimately related, so that both ought to be kept con stantly in view, and all efforts to promote the former had a bearing on the accomplishment of the latter. This being the case, the Gentiles ought to consider the restoration of the Jews as in no respect inimical to their interests, but as on every account most desirable. Paul therefore says, that what he had just stated in reference to the effect on the Jews, of the con version of the Gentiles, he designed specially for the latter. He wished them to consider that fact, as it would prevent any unkind feelings towards the Jews. lie had the better right thus to speak, as to him, especially, " the gospel of the uncircumcision had been committed." He himself, in all he did to secure the salvation of the Gentiles, or to render his office suc cessful, had an eye to the conversion of the Jews. The word (oo~d^(tj) rendered / magnify, means, first, to praise, to estimate and speak highly of a tJiin<j; secondly, to render </lori»i/x. as chap. viii. 30, k* Whom lie justifies, them he also glorifies;" and so in a multitude of cases. Either sense of the word suits this passage. The latter, however, is much better adapted to the following verse, and therefore is to be preferred: '1 endeavour to render my office glorious by bringing as many Gentiles as possible into the Redeemer's kingdom; it' so be it may provoke and arouse my countrymen.' His magnifying his office con sisted in the faithful discharge of its duties; and in thus labour ing assiduously for the salvation of the Gentiles, he aimed also at the salvation of the Jews. "Sic gentcs alloquitur: Quum

sim vobis peculiariter destinatus apostolus ideoque salutem restrain milii commissam singular] quodam studio debeam procurare, et quasi rebus omnibus omi<sis unum illud agere: officio tameri meo fideliter fungar, si quos e mea gente Christo lucrifecero: idquc erit in glnriam ministerii inei, atquc adeo in vestrum bonum." Calvin. The object of the apostle, therefore,

in these verses, is to declare that he always acted under the influence of the truth announced at the close of the 12th verse. He endeavoured to make the conversion of the Gentiles a means of good to the Jews.

VERSE 14. If lij any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them. This is tho reason (of course one among many) why Paul desired the con version of the Gentiles. If the two events, the salvation of both classes, were intimately related, there was no ground of ill feeling on either part. The Gentiles need not fear that the restoration of the Jews would be injurious to them, as though the happiness of one class were incompatible with that of the other.

VERSE 15. For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be but life from the dead.- Although Paul here returns to the sentiment of the 12th verse, this passage is logically connected with the pre ceding. The apostle had said, that even in labouring for the Gentiles, he had in view the salvation of the Jews; for if their rejection had occasioned so much good, how desirable must be their restoration. If the casting away of them be the recon ciling of the world. The reconciliation here spoken of is that which Paul so fully describes in Eph. ii. 11 — 22. A reconcilia tion by which those who were aliens and strangers have been brought nigh; reconciled at once to the church, the common wealth of Israel, and to God himself, " by the blood of Christ." This event has been facilitated, as remarked above, by the rejection of the Jews; what will the restoration of the Jews then be, but life from the dead? That is, it will be a most glorious event; as though a new world had risen, not only glo rious in itself, but in the highest degree beneficial to the Gen tiles. DC Brais and many others suppose that the apostle refers to the future declension of the Gentile church, from which the restoration of the Jews shall be the means of arous ing them. Of such an allusion, however, there is no intimation in the text. The most common and natural interpretation is that which considers the latter clause as merely a figurative expression of a joyful and desirable event. The conversion of the Jews will be attended with the most glorious consequences for the whole world.

Not only in the Scriptures, but also in profane literature, the transition from a state of depression and misery, to one of pros perity, is expressed by the natural figure of passing from death to life. The Old Testament prophets represented the glorious condition of the theocracy, consequent on the coming of Christ, in contrast with its previous condition, as a rising from the dead. This interpretation of the passage before us, is adopted by many of the best commentators, ancient and modern. There are, however, two other views presented. According to some, the life here spoken of is strictly spiritual life, and the dead from which it springs are the spiritually dead. The meaning would then be, that the conversion of the Jews would be the occasion, or the means, of awakening many of the Gentiles to spiritual life. This idea, however, is included in the former interpretation, because the summa felicitas, the state of great prosperity which the church is to enjoy when the Jews are restored, is a religious prosperity. It supposes the conversion of great multitudes of men, and the general spread and power of the gospel. But this does not justify us in confmino- the words to this spiritual sense. The latter clause, according to this view, expresses no more than the former clause. Tlie reconciliation of t/tc world, implies, of course, the conversion of multitudes of men, and the prevalence of true religion. The Itfe from t/ie dead, is more than this. It is not only a greater measure of the former blessing, but a glorious and happy con dition therewith connected, and consequent thereon. The other view of the passage is that given by Chrysostom, and adopted by many of the!>e>t modern commentators, as Tholuck (in his second edition.) J)0 Wette. Meyer, and others. It assumes that Z<'>7, s* i>zxu(M (life from the dead,) refers to the resurrection of the dead. The idea is, that the conversion of the Jews is the condition precedent of that great event. When the Jews are converted, then comes the resurrection and the consumma tion of Christ s kingdom. But nowhere else in Scripture is the literal resurrection expressed by the words ^i»rt Ix \,zyjnl)u. Jlad Paul intended a reference to the resurrection, no reason can be assigned why he did not employ the; established and familiar words, u.\,(j.<j-afK~ Ix ^s/o^v. If he meant the resurrec tion, why did he not say so? Why use a general phrase, which is elsewhere used to express another idea? Besides this, it is not according to the analogy of Scripture, that the resurrection of the dead, and the change in those who shall be then alive, (1 Cor. xv. ol, 1 Thess. iv. 14 — 18,) are to be immediate, con sequent on the conversion of the Jews. The resurrection is not to occur until k-the end." A new state of things, a new mode of existence, is to be then introduced. Flesh and blood, i. e., our bodies as now organized, (the awoa (pyfctxov^ cannot inherit tho kingdom of God. They are not suited for the state of being which is to follow the resurrection. If, therefore, the world is to continue after the conversion of the Jews, that event will not inaugurate the resurrection.

VERSE 16. For if the first-fruits he holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root be holy, so also are the branches. Under two striking and appropriate figures, the apostle expresses the general idea, l If one portion of the Jewish people is holy, so also is the other.' With regard to this interesting passage, the first point to be settled is the allusion in the figurative expres sion in the first clause. The Jews were commanded to offer a certain portion of all the productions of the earth to God, as an expression of gratitude and acknowledgment of depend ence. This offering, called the first-fruits, was to be made, first, from the productions in their natural state (Ex. xxiii. 19;) and, secondly, from the meal, wine, oil, and dough, as prepared for use. Num. xv. 20, " Of the first of your dough ye shall give unto the Lord a heave-offering in all your generations;" Neh. x. 37, Deut. xviii. 14. If the allusion of the apostle is to the former of these offerings, then the first-fruits must refer to a portion of the harvest or vintage presented to God, and the lump to the residue of the grain or grapes. If the allusion be to the second, then the first-fruits mean the portion of dough offered to God, and the lump the residue of the mass. The latter is undoubtedly most consistent with the meaning of the word ((f'jfta/jLa) used by the apostle, which can hardly be under stood as referring to heaps of grain, or other productions of the earth. In either case, however, the purport of the illustration is the same.

A second question is, Who are intended by the first-fruits and the root, and by the lump and the branches, in these two figures? With respect to this question, the following are the most common and plausible answers: 1. The first-fruits are understood to mean the Jews first converted to the Christian faith, who became, as it were, the root of the Christian church. According to this view of the passage, the apostle designs to say, < Since the first converts to the gospel were Jews, it is evident that the nation, as such, is not cast off by God; as a portion of them is holy (or have been accepted of God,) so may the residue be.' 2. By the first-fruits and the root, may be understood the patriarchs, the forefathers of the Jews; and by the lump and the branches, the residue of the nation, or the Jews as a people. That this latter is the true meaning of the passage seems very evident: 1. Because this interpretation alone preserves the propriety of the figure. How can the unconverted Jews or the Jewish nation be called the branches of the portion that became followers of Christ? The Gentile Christians might be so called, but not the Jewish people, as such. On the other hand, nothing is more natural than to call the ancestors the root, and their descendants the branches.

2. This interpretation best suits the design of the apostle. lie wishes to show that the conversion of the Jews, which he had declared to be so desirable for the Gentiles, was a probable event. He proves this hv referring to the relation of their ancestors to God. If they were the peculiar people of God, their descendants may be regarded as his also, since the cove nant was not with Abraham only, but also with his seed.

3. This is the apostle's own explanation in ver. -8, where the unconverted Jews, or Hebrew nation, as such, are said to be "beloved for the father's sake.'' 4. This interpretation alone can be consistently carried through the following verses. The Gentile Christians are not said (ver. IT) to be grafted into the stock of the converted Jews, but as branches with them they are united to a common stock. And the stock into which the branches, now broken off, are to be again grafted, is not the Jewish part of the Christian church, but the original family or household of God.

The word (#j'.'o~) rendered /Wy, which properly means clean, is used in two general senses in the Scriptures: 1. Consecrated; 2. Pure. In the former of these, it is applied, times without number, in the Old Testament, to persons, places, and things considered as peculiarly devoted to the service of God. So the whole Jewish people, without reference to their moral charac ter, are called a holy people. So, too, the temple, tabernacle, and all their contents, were called holy, &c. The use of the word in this sense, in reference to places and things, is not unfrequent in the New Testament. Matt. iv. 5, where Jerusa lem is called the "holy city;" see Matt. vii. 6, xxiv. 15, xxvii. 53, and often. It is, however, rarely so used in relation to persons. In the vast majority of instances, when thus applied, it means, morally pure; yet, in some cases, it signifies, devoted to God. Luke ii. 23, "Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy unto the Lord." Perhaps, too, in the expressions, "the holy prophets," Luke i. 70, and "holy apos tles," Eph. iii. 5, the reference is rather to their relation to God, as persons devoted to his service, than to their moral cha racter. In 1 Cor. vii. 14, the children of professing Christians are called "holy," not in reference to their moral condition, but their relation to the church. In like manner, in this pas sage, the Jews, as a people, arc called holy, because peculiarly consecrated to God, separated from the rest of the world for his service.*

The connection of this verse with the preceding, its import and bearing on the apostle's object are therefore clear. The restoration of the Jews, which will be attended with such bene ficial results for the whole world, is to be expected, because of their peculiar relation to God as his chosen people. God, in selecting the Hebrew patriarchs, and setting them apart for his service, had reference to their descendants, as well as to them selves; and designed that the Jews, as a people, should, to the latest generations, be specially devoted to himself. They stand now, therefore, and ever have stood, in a relation to God which no other nation ever has sustained; and, in consequence of this relation, their restoration to the divine favour is an event in itself probable, and one, which Paul afterwards teaches (ver. 25.) God has determined to accomplish.

VERSES 17 — 24. The object of these verses is to make such an application of the truths which Paul had just taught as should prevent any feeling of exultation or triumph of the Gen tile Christians over the Jews. It is true that the Jews have been partially rejected from the church of God; that the Gen tiles have been introduced into it; and that the Jews are ulti mately to be restored. These things, however, afford no ground

* Non est mirum, si in patre sue Jutkei sanctificati sint. Nihil hie erit difficultatis, si sanctitatem intelligas nihil esse aliud, quam spiritualem gene ris cobilitatem, et earn quidem non propriam naturae, sed quae ex foedere manabat.... Electi populi dignitas, proprie loquendo, supernaturale privilegium est. — Calvin.

of boasting to the Gentiles, but rather cause of thankfulness tnd caution. Paul illustrates these truths by a very appropri ate figure.

VERSE 17. And if some of the branches be broken off, and ihou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, &c. The words *v o.it-ul.' may refer to the branches in general, arid be rendered as in our version, amonij them; or they may refer to the rejected branches, and be rendered, in their place. ' Some of the branches have been broken off, and jou have been inserted in their place.' The purport of the passage is plain. Some of the Jews were broken off and rejected; the Gentiles, though apparent! v little susceptible of such a blessing, were introduced into the church, and made to partake of all its pecu liar and precious privileges. The Jewish church is compared to the olive tree, one of the most durable, productive, and valuable of the productions of the earth, because it was highly favoured, and therefore valued in the sight of God. The Gen tiles are compared to the wild olive, one <>f the most worthless of trees, to express the degradation of their state, considered as estranged, from God. As it is customary to engraft good scions on inferior stocks, the nature of the product being deter mined by the graft, and not the root, it has hern thought that the illustration of the apostle is not very apposite. But the difficulty mav result from pressing the comparison too far. The idea may be simply this, 'As the scion of one tree is engrafted into another, and has no independent life, but derives all its vigour from the root, so the Gentiles are introduced among the people of God, not to confer but to receive good.' It is how ever said, on the authority of ancient writers and of modern travellers, to have been not unusual to graft the wild on the cultivated olive.* Even if this were so, it would not be perti nent to the apostle's object. He does not mean to say, that the graft imparts life and vigour to the root, but the very reverse. There is no necessity for departing from the common view.

* COLUMELLA dc Re rustica, V. 9. Solent terebrari olcne lactoo, in foramen talea viridis oleastri demittitur, et sic velut inita arbor foccundo semine fertilior exstat.

PALLADIUS de Re rustica, XIV. 53. Foccundat sterilis pinguis oleaster olivas, et quae non novit munera ferre docet.

The Gentiles are saved by their introduction into that church of which the patriarchs were the root.

It is plain from this verse, that the root in this passage can not be the early converts from among the Jews, but the ancient covenant people of God. The ancient theocracy was merged in the kingdom of Christ. The latter is but an enlargement and elevation of the former. There has, therefore, never been other than one family of God on earth, existing under different institutions, and enjoying different degrees of light and favour. This family was composed, of old, of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and their descendants. At the advent, its name and circumstances were changed; many of its old members were cast out, and others introduced, but it is the same family still. Or, to return to the apostle's illustration, it is the same tree, some of the branches only beincr changed.

VERSE 18. Boast not thyself against the branches; xaraxau^do/jLou means, to boast against, in the sense of glorying over any one. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. A concise expression, for, If thou boast, (i. e., art disposed to do it.) consider that thou bearest not the root, &c. The Gentiles had been brought into fellowship with the patri archs, not the patriarchs with them. Salvation was from the Jews. The truth that the Jews were the channel of blessings to the Gentiles, and riot the reverse, was adapted to prevent all ungenerous and self-confident exultation of the latter over the former.

VERSE 10. You ivill say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. The apostle guards against a fur ther ground of self-complacency on the part of the Gentiles. Although forced to admit that the root bore him, and not he the root, yet he might pride himself on the fact, that the branches were broken off, and he put in their place. To this it is answered, that the Gentiles are not authorized to infer, from the fact that the Jews were rejected, and they chosen, that this occurred on the ground of their being in themselves better than the Jews. The true reason of this dispensation is assigned in the next verse.

VERSE 20. Well, because of unbelief they were broken off, &c. The fact that they were broken off is admitted, but the inference drawn by the Gentiles is denied. It was not for any personal considerations that the one was rejected and the other chosen. The Jews were rejected because they rejected the Saviour, and the only tenure by which the advantages of a covenant relation to God can be retained is faith. The Gen tiles will not be secure, because Gentiles, any more than the Jews were safe, because Jews. Instead, therefore, of being high-minded, they should fear.

VERSE 21. If Grod spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. The clause, /JLTJXCOZ o'jos ak (fsiff^rcu, must depend on something understood. Our trans lators supply ^/cf-srs, take heed; others, ^o/?oy//or, I fear. The Gentile has even more reason to fear than the Jew had. It was in itself far more probable that God would spare a people so lung connected with him in the most peculiar manner, than that he should spare those who had no such claims on his mercy. The idea intended to be expressed by this verse pro bably is, that the Jews, from their relation to God, were more likely to be spared than the Gentiles, inasmuch as God is accustomed to bear long with the recipients of his mercy, before he casts them oft"; even as a father bears long with a son, before he discards him and adopts another.

VERSE 22. J>e/told, therefore, the goodness and severity of Grod: on them which fell, severity; but on thee, goodness. Instead of the accusatives (\-u~o uiav and ^o^oror^ra, Lachmann and Tischendorf read a-oroitia and ft^crcbrrfi. If this reading be adopted, icrri^ must be supplied. 'Towards the one class there is severity, towards the other kindness.' The effect which the consideration of these dispensations of God should produce, is gratitude and fear. Gratitude, in view of the favour which we Gentiles have received, and fear lest we should be cut off; for our security does not depend upon our now enjoying the blessings of the church of God, but is dependent on our continuing in the divine yoodncss or favour, (Rom. iii. 4, Titus iii. 4,) that is, on our doing nothing to forfeit that favour; its continuance being suspended on the condition of our fidelity. If thou continue in (his) goodness, eai< i~t/jisii<7jZ TTJ XprjffTOTTjTe, is sometimes explained to mean, if thou continue in goodness, i. o., in being good, according to the analogy of the following clause, IJ.TI eTttpsivoMJi TYJ axtoria, if they continue not in unbe lief. But this is inconsistent with the context. The jj^arorr^ spoken of, is the goodness or love of God. Compare Acts xni. 43, Tipoanevecv -crt yu.(>t~t rorj 6zorj, to remain in the grace of God. "Otherwise thou also shalt be cut off," k~st xae oi> IxxoTTijaft since, in that case, (i. c., if thou continuest not in his goodness,) thou also shalt be cut off; ixxo-^ar^ second future indicative passive. There is nothing in this language incon sistent with the doctrine of the final perseverance of believers, even supposing the passage to refer to individuals; for it is very common to speak thus hypothetically, and say that an event cannot, or will not come to pass, unless the requisite means are employed, when the occurrence of the event had been rendered certain by the previous purpose and promise of God; see Acts xxvii. 31. The foundation of all such state ments is the simple truth, that He who purposes the end, pur poses also the means; and he brings about the end by securing the use of the means. And when rational agents are concerned, he secures the use of the means by rational considerations pre sented to their minds, and rendered effectual by his grace, when the end contemplated is good. This passage, however, has no legitimate bearing on this subject, Paul is not speaking of the connection of individual believers with Christ, which lie had abundantly taught in chap. viii. and elsewhere, to be indissolu ble, but of the relation of communities to the church and its various privileges. There is no promise or covenant on the part of God, securing to the Gentiles the enjoyment of these blessings through all generations, any more than there was any such promise to protect the Jews from the consequences of their unbelief. The continuance of these favours depends on the conduct of each successive generation. Paul therefore says to the Gentile, that he must continue in the divine favour, u other wise thou also shalt be cut off."

VERSE 23. And they also, if they bide not in unbelief, shall be graffed in, £c. The principle which the apostle had just stated as applicable to the Gentiles, is applicable also to the Jews. Neither one nor the other, simply because Jew or Gen tile, is either retained in the church or excluded from it. As the one continues in thia relation to God, only on condition of faith, so the other is excluded by his unbelief alone. Nothing but unbelief prevents the Jews being brought back, "for God is able to graff them in again."* That is, not merely has God the power to accomplish this result, but the difficulty or impedi ment is not in him, but solely in themselves. There is no inexorable purpose in the divine mind, nor any insuperable obstacle in the circumstances of the case, which forbids their restoration; on the contrary, the event is, in itself considered, far more probable than the calling of the Gentiles.

VERSE '24. For if thou ivert cut out of the- olice-tree which is wild by nature, and wert yralYcd contrary to nature into a </or>d olive-tree; how much more, &C. The connection indicated by fan (for,) is not with the preceding clause, Gr<>d /* alle to graff them in cu/aiti, because what follows does not prove the power of God to restore the Jews to their ancient privileges, but that their restoration is a probable event. The connection, there fore, is with the main idea in the context, as expressed in ver. 23, fctThev shall be (/raffed in." This maybe expected, he savs, fur, &c. The Gentiles were of the wild olive, having no natural connection with the tree into which they were graffed. The Jews were its natural branches. In itself con sidered, therefore, their reunion with their native stalk was more probable than the grafting in of the Gentiles. The oppo sition, however, between yjj-<i. C''><T.^ and ~<i.<>u. cvrrrv, do^s not refer to any natural fitness of the Jews, as a race, for the true religion, in opposition to the unsuitableness of the Gentiles. According to the Scriptures, there is no difference, so far as their relation to God is concerned, between the different races of men, since all have sinned. They are all alike unfit for the service and enjoyment of God, and alike unable to save them selves. And, on the other hand, they are alike susceptible of the salvation of the gospel, which is adapted to all classes of men. The words in question are used only to preserve the figure of a tree and its branches. The simple meaning, there fore, of this verse is, that the future restoration of the Jews is,

* Frigidum apud homines profanos argumentum hoc foret.... At quia fideles quoties Dei potentiam nominari audiunt, quasi praisens opus intuentur, hauc rationem satis putavit valere, ad percellendas eorum mentes. — Calvin.

in itself, a more probable event than the introduction of the Gentiles into the church of God. This, of course, supposes that God regarded the Jews, on account of their relation to him, with peculiar favour, and that there is still something in their relation to the ancient servants of God, and his covenant with them, which causes them to be regarded with special interest. As men look upon the children of their early friends with kinder feelings than on the children of strangers, God refers to this fact to make us sensible that he still retains pur poses of peculiar mercy towards his ancient people. The restoration of this people, therefore, to the blessings of the church of God, is far from being an improbable event.

VERSE 2<3. For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits, that blindness in part has happened unto Israel, until the fulness of the Grentiles be come in. Although the interpretations given of tins and the following verses are very numerous, they are all modifications of one or the other of the two following general views of the passage. 1. Many understand the apostle as not predicting any remarkable future conversion of the Jewish nation, but merely declaring that the hardening or blinding of the nation, was not such as to prevent many Jews entering the Christian church, as long as the Gentiles continued to come in. Thus all the true Israel, embracing Jews as well as Gentiles, should ultimately be saved. 2. The second general view sup poses the apostle, on the contrary, to predict a great and gene ral conversion of the Jewish people, which should take place when the fulness of the Gentiles had been brought in, and that then, and not till then, those prophecies should be fully accom plished which speak of the salvation of Israel. The former of these views was presented, in different forms, by the great body of the authors who lived about the time of the Reformation; who were led by the extravagancies of the Millenarians, who built much on this passage, to explain away its prophetic character almost entirely.* Olshausen, in order to show the

* Wolfiug, in his Curae, gives an account of the authors who discuss the meaning of this and the following verses, as Calovius in Bibliis Illustratis; Buddeus in Institutio Theol. Dog., p. 672. Wolfius himself says, " Contextus

suadet credere, Paulum id hie tantum agere, ut conversi e Gentilibus non

hostile feeling entertained by the Reformers towards the Jews, quotes a passage from Luther, which does not admit of trans lation: "Em jiidisch Herz ist so stoch-stein-eisen-teufelhart, das mit keiner Weise zu bewegen ist;— es siiul junge Teufel zur Holle verdammt, diese Teufelskinder zu bekehren ist unmbglich, wie etliche solchen Wahn sclibpfcn aus der Epistel an die Rbmer."

The second view has been the one generally received in every age of the church, with the exception of the period just referred to. That it is the correct interpretation, appears evident for the following reasons: 1. The whole context and drift of the apostle's discourse is in its favour. In the preceding part of the chapter, Paul, in the plainest terms, had taught that the conversion of the Jews was a probable event, and that it would be in the highest degree beneficial and glorious for the whole world. This idea is presented in various forms; and practical lessons are deduced from it in such a way as to show that ho contemplated something more than merely the silent addition of a few Israelites to the church during successive ages. 2. It is evident that Paul meant to say, that the.lews were to be restored in the sense in which they were then rejected. They were then rejected not merely as individuals, but as a commu nity, and therefore are to be restored as a community; see vs. 11, 15. How can the latter passage (ver. 15.) especially, be understood of the conversion of the small number of Jews which, from age to age, have joined the Christian Church? This surely has not been as "life from the dead," for the whole world. 8. It is plain from this and other parts of the dis course, that Paul refers to a great event; something which should attract universal attention. 4. In accordance with this idea, is the manner of introducing this verse, I would not lave you ignorant, brethren; see 1 Cor. x. 1, xii. 1, and elsewhere. Paul uses this form of address when he wishes to rouse the attention of his readers to something specially important. 5. The gradual conversion of a few Jews is no mystery, in the scriptural sense of the word. The word fjojffnjpeov, secret, is

existiment, Juilans omnem spem ad Christum in posterum perveniendi prsecisam esse, sed ita potius statuant, ipsis non minus ceteris Gentilibus, nondum converts, viarn patere, qua ad Christum perducantur."

not generally used, in the New Testament, in the sense of tho word mystery. It means simply, what is hidden, or unknown; whether because it is an unrevealed purpose of God; or because it is future; or because it is covered up in parables or symbols, (as the mystery of the seven candlesticks, Rev. i. 20;) or because it lies beyond the reach of the human mind, Eph. v. 32. It is only in the last-mentioned case that pjaryptov answers to our word mystery. Whatever needs an a~oxaAo(p^, to become an object of knowledge, is a piHrrfpeov. It is there fore used in reference to all the doctrines of the gospel which are not the truths of reason, but matters of divine revelation; Rom. xvi. 25, 1 Cor. ii. 7, iv. 1, Eph. vi. 19, &c. Hence minis ters are called stewards of the mysteries (i. e., of the revela tions) of God. It is also used of some one doctrine, considered as previously unknown and undiscoverable by human reason, however simple and intelligible in its own nature. Thus, the fact that the Gentiles should be admitted into the church of God, Paul calls a mystery, Eph. i. 9, iii. 4. Any future event, therefore, which could be known only by divine revelation, is a mystery. The fact that all should not die, though all should be changed, was a mystery, 1 Cor. xv. 51. In like manner, here, when Paul says, "I would not, brethren, have you igno rant of this mystery," he means to say, that the event to which he referred, was one which, depending on no secondary cause, but on the divine purpose, could be known only by divine reve lation. This description is certainly far more suitable to the annunciation of a prophecy, than to the statement of a fact which might have been confidently inferred from what God had already revealed. 6. The words, all Israel, in the next verse, cannot, as the first interpretation mentioned above would require, be understood of the spiritual Israel; because the word is just before used in a different sense, " blindness in part has happened unto Israel." This blindness is to continue until a certain time, when it is to be removed, and then all Israel is to be saved. It is plain, that Israel in these cases must be understood as referring to the same class of persons. This is also clear from the opposition between the terms Israel and Gentile. 7. The words (d%pez ou,) correctly rendered in our version, until, cannot, so consistently with usage, be translated, as long as, or so that, followed as they are here by the aorist subjunctive; see Rev. xv. 8, xvii. 17: compare Hob. iii. 13. 8. The following verses seem to require this interpretation. The result contemplated is one which shall be a full accomplish ment of those prophecies which predicted the salvation of the Jews. The reason given in vs. 28, 29, for the event to which Paul refers, is the unchangeableness of God's purposes and covenant. Having once taken the Jews into special connection with himself, he never intended to cast them off for ever. The apostle sums up his discourse by saying, 'As the Gentiles were formerly unbelieving, and yet obtained mercy, so the Jews who now disbelieve, shall hereafter be brought in; and thus God will have mercy on all, both Jews and Gentiles.' From all these considerations, it seems obvious that Paul intended here to predict that the time would come when the Jews, as a body, should be converted unto the Lord; compare 2 Cor. iii. 10. The prediction contained in this verse is to be explained by the context. The rejection of the Jews at the time of Christ, did not involve the perdition of every individual of that nation. Thousands, and even myriads, believed and were saved. So the restoration here foretold is not to be understood as including every individual of the Jewish people, but simply that there is to be a national restoration.

Li'st. /jc sit null he wise in your own conceit*. This is given as the reason why the apostle wished the Gentiles to know and consider the event which he was about to announce. This clause mav mean either, 'Lest ye proudly imagine that your own ideas of the destiny of the Jews arc correct;' or, 'Lest ye be proud and elated, as though you were better and more highly favoured than the Jews.' The former is perhaps most in accordance with the literal meaning of the words Uv ka'Jtolz (pfx'mfjLo:;) see Prov. iii. 7.

Blindness in part, i. e., partial blindness; partial as to its extent and continuance. Because not all the Jews were thus blinded, nor was the nation to remain blind for ever. The words d~b /isoo'j- arc not to be connected with -wttcofftz, nor with T(IJ laoar^; but with fi?o\>zv. 'Blindness has partially happened to Israel.' The reference, however, is not to the decree, but to the continuance of this blindness. It is not final

Until the fulness of the Crentiles be come in. Until, (typcc ou9 marks the terminus ad quern. This blindness of Israel is to continue until something else happened. There were to be, and have been numerous conversions to Christianity from among the Jews, in every age since the advent; but their national conver sion is not to occur until the heathen are converted. What, however, is definitely meant by the TrXypaifJia TCOV Id-vcov, it is not easy to determine. The question is not to be decided by the mere signification of the words. In whatever way they may be explained, the general idea is the same. The xtfpco/jia of the Gentiles may mean, that which makes the Gentiles, as to number, full. Or, according to others, the Gentiles themselves are the ntypco/jta, i. e., the complement; they make full the vacancy left by the rejection of the Jews. Or, as is commonly assumed, xtypcDjuta is be taken in a secondary sense, for multi tude. Compare Gen. xlviii. 19: "Multitude (literally fulness) of nations;" and Isa. xxxi. 4, "Multitude (fulness) of shep herds." This does not mean the totality of the Gentiles. It is not Paul's doctrine, that all Gentiles who ever lived are to be introduced into the kingdom of Christ. Nor does it mean, that all the Gentiles who may be alive when the Jews are converted, shall be true Christians. All that can be safely inferred from this language is, that the Gentiles, as a body, the mass of the Gentile world, will be converted before the restoration of the Jews, as a nation. Much will remain to be accomplished after that event; and in the accomplishment of what shall then remain to be done, the Jews are to have a prominent agency. Their conversion will be as life from the dead to the church. Wo must remember, that Paul is here speaking as a prophet, iv O.T:OXO.A'J^EC, 1 Cor. xiv. 6, and therefore his language must be interpreted by the rules of prophetic interpretation. Prophecy is riot proleptic history. It is not designed to give us the know ledge of the future which history gives us of the past. Great events are foretold; but the mode of their occurrence, their details, and their consequences, can only be learned by the event. It is in the retrospect that the foreshadowing of the future is seen to be miraculous and divine.

VERSE 26. And so all Israel shall be saved, as it is written. Israel, here, from the context, must mean the Jewish people, and all Israel, the whole nation. The Jews, as a people, arc now rejected; as a people, they are to be restored. As their rejection, although national, did not include the rejection of every individual; so their restoration, although in like manner national, need not be assumed to include the salvation of every individual Jew. 11^ ^ lao'ir^ is not therefore to be here under stood to mean, all the true people of (lod, as Augustin, Calvin, and rnanv others explain it: nor all the elect Jews, i. e., all that part of the nation which constitute "the remnant according to the election of grace;" but the whole nation, as a nation.

In support of what he had said, the apostle appeals to the Old Testament prophecies. It is probable that here, as else where, he does not intend to refer exclusively to any one predic tion, but to irive the general sense of many specific declarations of the ancient prophets. Isa. lix. 20, 21, xxvii. 0, Jer. xxxi.

immediately before the apostle's mind, and to have given colour to his language. In Isa. lix. 20, it is said, "The Redeemer shall come to /ion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob." Instead of Ix Zid^, out of /Aon, the LXX. have £•/£/£:, -KO^. for the sake of Z ion, the English version, to Zion. In Ps. xiv. 7, it is, out of Zion. The latter part of the verse, as given bv Paul, does not agree with the Hebrew, which is cor rectly rendered in our version, "To such as turn from trans gression (literally, to the eonverts of transgression) in Jacob." Paul follows the LXX., xa: a-ufrrnifz: aazfeiaz 'i"o V^r^9, and shall turn iniquity from Jacob. In Isa. xxvii. 0, the phrase is, "the iniquity of Jacob shall be purged." The general idea expressed in these passages is, "The God, the deliverer, shall come for the salvation of Jacob," i. e., of the Jews. And this is all that Paul desired to establish by these ancient prophecies. The apostle teaches, that the deliverance promised of old, and to which the prophet Isaiah referred in the passage above cited, included much more than the conversion of the comparatively few Jews who believed in Christ at the advent. The full accomplishment of the promise, that he should turn away ungodliness from Jacob, contemplated the conversion of the whole nation, as such, to the Lord. We are, of course, bound to receive the apostle's interpretation as correct; and there is the less difficulty in this, as there is nothing in the original passage at all incompatible with it, and as it accords with the nature of God's covenant with his ancient people.

VERSE 27. For this is my covenant unto them; aZ-y WJTOK; ^ -an £twrj dta&yxy, this for them is the covenant which proceeds from me. In the Hebrew it is simply, my covenant; so that 7-jj.n l/wrj is for the genitive. See, however, Winer, iii., § 30. The pronoun C&TT,, this, is to be referred to what follows; this is my covenant, (or«y, when,) that I will take away their sins. The demonstrative pronoun may be followed, and its reference determined, by rW, John xvii. 3; idv, 1 John ii. 3; and as in this case, and in 1 John v. 2, by orav. The quotation in this verse, as that in ver. 26, is not from any one place. The words, This is my covenant with them, occur in Isa. lix. 21; the clause, When I shall take away their sins, is from Isa. xxvii. 9, as ren dered by the LXX., who give the sense of the Hebrew, "Their iniquity shall be purged;" or, literally, to take away his sin. All the apostle intended to prove, is proved by the language of the prophets. The covenant of God with his ancient people secured, after their apostacy and consequent banishment in Babylon, and their dispersion over the earth, and their rejec tion of Christ, the ultimate purging away of their sin, and their restoration, as a nation, to the Messiah's kingdom. This national conversion is also predicted in Zech. xii. 10, and in many other passages of the Old Testament.