Commentary on Romans; Systematic Theology

4. The source of our life is in God; without intercourse with him, therefore, we cannot derive those supplies of grace which are requisite to preserve the spirit of piety in our hearts, and to send a vital influence through the various duties and avoca tions of life. Hence the absolute necessity of being " instant in prayer," ver. 12.

5. God has made of one blood all men that dwell upon the face of the earth. There is in this fact of a common origin, and the possession of a common nature, a sufficient ground for the inculcation of an universal sympathy with all our fellow men. As he is no true Christian who is destitute of a genuine sympathy for his fellow Christians, so he is very far from being a man such as God approves, who does not "rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep," ver. 15.

Viewed in relation to God, and in our own absolute insignifi cance, we have little reason to be wise or important in our own conceits. A proper self-knowledge will preserve us from pride, ambition, and contempt of others, ver. 1*3.

7. Abstaining from evil is but one half of duty. It is not enough to avoid imprecating evil upon our enemies; we must sincerely desire and pray for their welfare. Nor is it sufficient not to recompense evil for evil; we must return good for evil,

8. The prerogatives of judgment and vengeance belong to God, we have no right, therefore, to arrogate them to ourselves, except in those cases in which, for his glory and the good of society, he has given us authority. All condemnation of others for self-gratification, and all private revenge is inconsistent with the gospel, vs. 11 — 21.

1. Christians should never forget that faith without works is dead. It is not more important to believe what God has revealed, than to do what he has commanded. A faith, there fore, which does not produce love, kindness, sympathy, hu mility, the forgiveness of injuries, &c., can do us little good, vs. (J— 21.

2. It is peculiarly characteristic of the spirit of the gospel that it turns the heart towards others, and away from our own interests. Self is not the Christian's centre; men are loved because they are men, Christians because they are Christians; the former with sincere sympathy and benevolence, the latter with brotherly affection. The happiness and feelings of others, the gospel teaches us to consult in small, as well as in great matters, anticipating each other in all acts of kindness and attention, vs. 9 — 13.

3. The benevolence of the gospel is active and religious; it leads to constant efforts, and is imbued with a spirit of piety,

4. We must remember that without Christ we can do nothing; that it is not we that live, but Christ that liveth in us. If, therefore, we attempt to discharge the duties here enjoined apart from him, we shall be as a branch severed from the vine;

and unless we are " instant in prayer," this union with Christ cannot be kept up, ver. 12.

5. Alms-giving and hospitality, in some ages of the church, have been unduly exalted, as though they were the whole of benevolence, and the greater part of piety. While we avoid this extreme, we should remember that we are stewards of God, and that " Whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, hath not the love of God dwelling in him," ver. 13. 1 John iii. 17.

6. One of the most beautiful exhibitions of the character of our Saviour was afforded by his conduct under persecution. "He was led as a lamb to the slaughter;" "when he was reviled, he reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not." Even martyrs dying for the truth have not always been able to avoid the prediction of evil to their persecutors; so much easier is it to abstain from recompensing evil for evil, than really to love and pray for the good of our enemies. This, however, is Christian duty, such is the spirit of the gospel. Just so far, therefore, as we find our hearts indisposed to bless those who curse us, or inclined to indulge even a secret satis faction when evil comes upon them, are we unchristian in our temper, vs. 19 — 21.

7. Nothing is so powerful as goodness; it is the most effica cious means to subdue enemies, and put down opposition. Men whose minds can withstand argument, and whose hearts rebel against threats, are not proof against the persuasive influence of unfeigned love; there is, therefore, no more important col lateral reason for being good, than that it increases our power to do good, vs. 20 — 21.

THE chapter treats mainly of our political duties. From ver« 1 to ver. 7 inclusive, the apostle enforces the duties which we owe to civil magistrates. From ver. 8 to ver. 10, he refers to the more general obligations under which Christians are placed, but still with special reference to their civil and social relations. From ver. 11 tc the end of the chapter, he enjoins un exem plary arid holy deportment.

1. l>y the consideration that civil government is a divine insti tution, and, therefore, resistance to magistrates in the exercise of their lawful authority is disobedience to (iod. vs. 1, 2.

2. From the end or design of their appointment, which is to promote the good of society, to be a terror to evil doers, and a praise to them that do well', vs.:*», 4. 3. Because such subjec tion is a moral, as well as civil duty, ver. 5. On these grounds the payment of tribute or taxes, and general deference, are to be cheerfully rendered, vs. 6, 7.

Christian? are bound not only to be obedient to those in authority, but also to perform all social and relative duties, especially that of love, which includes and secures the obser vance of all others, vs. 8 — 10. A pure and exemplary life as members of society is enforced by the consideration that the night is far spent and that the day is at hand, that the time of suffering and trial is nearly over, and that of deliverance ap proaching, vs. 11 — 14.

VERSE 1. Let every soul be subject to tie liicflier powers. The expression every soul is often used as equivalent to every one; it is at times, however, emphatic, and such is probably the case in this passage. By higher powers are most commonly and naturally understood those in authority, without reference to their grade of office, or their character. We are to be subject not only to the supreme magistrates, but to all who have authority over us. The abstract word powers or authori ties (l^oualcc) is used for those who are invested with power, Luke xii. 11, Eph. i. 21, iii. 10, &c., &c. The word (dnsps^coJ) rendered higher, is applied to any one who, in dignity and authority, excels us. In 1 Peter ii. 13, it is applied to the king as supreme, i. e., superior to all other magistrates. But here one class of magistrates is not brought into comparison with another, but they are spoken of as being over other men who are not in office. It is a very unnatural interpretation which makes this word refer to the character of the magistrates, as though the sense were, 'Be subject to good magistrates/ This is contrary to the usage of the term, and inconsistent with the context. Obedience is not enjoined on the ground of the personal merit of those in authority, but on the ground of their official station.

There was peculiar necessity, during the apostolic age, for inculcating the duty of obedience to civil magistrates. This necessity arose in part from the fact that a large portion of the converts to Christianity had been Jews, and were peculiarly indisposed to submit to the heathen authorities. This indispo sition (as far as it was peculiar) arose from the prevailing impression among them, that this subjection was unlawful, or at least highly derogatory to their character as the people of God, who had so long lived under a theocracy. In Deut. xvii. 15, it is said, "Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the Lord thy God shall choose; one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee; thou shalt not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother." It was a question, therefore, constantly agitated among them, "Is it lawful to pay tribute unto Crcsar, or not?" A question which the great majority were at least secretly inclined to answer in the negative. Another source of the restlessness of the Jews under a foreign yoke, was the idea which they entertained of the nature of the Messiah's kingdom. As they expected a tern- poral Prince, whose kingdom should be of this world, they were ready to rise in rebellion at the call of every one who cried, u I am Christ." The history of the Jews at this period shows how great was the effect produced by these and similar causes, on their feelings towards the Roman government. They were con tinually breaking out into tumults, which led to their expulsion from Rome.* and, finally, to the utter destruction of Jerusalem. It is therefore not a matter of surprise, that converts from among such a people should need the injunction. " Be subject to the higher powers." Besides the effect of their previous opinions and feelings, there is something in the character of Christianity itself, and in the incidental results of the excite ment which it occasions, to account for the repugnance of many of the early Christians to submit to their civil rulers. They wrested, no doubt, the doctrine of Christian liberty, as they did other doctrines, to suit their own inclinations. This result, however, is to be attributed not to religion, but to the improper feelings of those into whose minds the form of truth, without its full power, had been received.

For there /.<? -no potver hut of Crod; and the powers that be are ordained of God. (ft fdn kaTev kzo'jtria s! [JLTJ <l~o $soi>. This is a very comprehensive proposition. All authority is of God. No man has any rightful power over other men, which is not derived from God. All human power is delegated and minis terial. This is true of parents, of magistrates, and of church officers. This, however, is not all the passage means. It not only asserts that all government (izo'jtria, authority) is (d~() $soy) derived from God, but that every magistrate is of God; that is, his authority is jure dirino. The word Izwala is evidently, in this connection, used in a concrete SCMISC. This is plain from the use of the word in the other clauses of the verse. " The higher powers," and "the powers that be," are concrete terms, meaning those invested with power. Compare vs. 3, 4, where "rulers" and "ministers" are substituted for the abstract *' powers." The doctrine here taught is the ground of the injunction contained in the first clause of the verse. We are to obey magistrates, because they derive their authority from God. Not only is human government a divine institution, but the form in which that government exists, and the persons by whom its functions are exercised, are determined by his pro vidence. All magistrates of whatever grade are to be regarded as acting by divine appointment; not that God designates the individuals, but that it being his will that there should be magistrates, every person, who is in point of fact clothed with authority, is to be regarded as having a claim to obedience, founded on the will of God. In like manner, the authority of parents over their children, of husbands over their wives, of masters over their servants, is of God's ordination. There » is no limitation to the injunction in this verse, so far as the! objects of obedience are concerned, although there is as tpf the extent of the obedience itself. That is, we are to obey alii) > who are in actual authority over us, whether their authority bej- ''legitimate or usurped, whether they are just or unjust. The'' actual reigning emperor was to be obeyed by the Roman Chris- ' tians, whatever they might think as to his title to the sceptre. But if he transcended his authority, and required them to wor ship idols, they were to obey God rather than man. This is the limitation to all human authority. Whenever obedience to man is inconsistent with obedience to God, then disobedience becomes a duty.

, VERSE 2. Whoso, therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of G-od. This is an obvious inference from the r*tu doctrine of the preceding verse. If it is the will of God that there should be civil government, and persons appointed to ' exercise authority over others, it is plain that to resist such persons in the exercise of their lawful authority is an act of disobedience to God.

^ And they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

ation is by modern usage restricted to the final and eternal condemnation of the wicked, it is unsuitcd to this passnije and some others in which it occurs in our version; see 1 Cor. xi. 29. Pan) does not refer to the punishment which the civil magis trate may inflict; for he is speaking of disobedience to those in authority as a sin against God, which he will punish.

It is clear that this passage (vs. 1, 2) is applicable to men - living under every form of government, monarchical, aristocratical, or democratical, in all their various modifications. Those who are in authority are to be obeyed within their sphere, no matter how or by whom appointed. It is the cuvae kgovfficu, the powers that le, the de facto government, that is to be regarded as, for the time being, ordained of God. It was to Paul a matter of little importance whether the Koman emperor was appointed by the senate, the army, or the people; whether the assumption of the imperial authority by C;esar was just or unjust, or whether his successors had a legitimate claim to the throne or not. It was his object to lay down the simple prin ciple, that magistrates are to be obeyed. The extent of this obedience is to be determined from the nature of the case. They arc to be obeyed as magistrates, in the exercise of their lawful authority. When Paul commands wives to obey their husbands, they are required to obey them as husbands, not as masters, nor as kings; children are to obey their parents as parents, not as sovereigns; arid so in every other case. This passage, therefore, affords a very slight foundation for the doc trine of passive obedience.

VERSE 3. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. This verse is not to be connected with the second, but with the first, as it assigns an additional reason for the duty there enjoined. Magistrates are to be obeyed, for such is the will of God, and because they are appointed to repress evil and to promote good. There is a ground, therefore, in the very nature of their office, why they should not be resisted.

Wilt tliou then not be afraid of the power? do that which 19 good, and thou shall have praise of the same. That is, govern ment is not an evil to be feared, except by evil doers. As the magistrates are appointed for the punishment of evil, the way to avoid suffering from their authority is not to resist it, but to do that which is good. Paul is speaking of the legitimate

VERSE 4. For he is the minister of God for thee for good, &c. This whole verse is but an amplification of the preceding. 4 Government is a benevolent institution of God, designed for the benefit of men; and, therefore, should be respected and obeyed. As it has, however, the rightful authority to punish, it is to be feared by those that do evil.' For good, i. e., to secure or promote your welfare. Magistrates or rulers are not appointed for their own honour or advantage, but for the benefit of society, and, therefore, while those in subjection are on this account to obey them, they themselves are taught, what those in power are so apt to forget, that they are the servants of the people as well as the servants of God, and that the welfare of society is the only legitimate object which they as rulers are at liberty to pursue.

But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain; a revenger to execute wrath (s/c oprfv, i. e., for the purpose of punishment) upon him that docth evil. As one part of the design of government is to protect the good, so the other is to punish the wicked. The existence of this delegated authority is, therefore, a reason why men should abstain from the commission of evil. He beareth not the sword in vain, i. e., it is not in vain that he is invested with authority to punish. The reference is not to the dagger worn by the Roman emperors as a sign of office, as /jtd%atpa in the New Tes tament always means sword, which of old was the symbol of authority, and specially of the right of life and death. As the common method of inflicting capital punishment was by decapi tation with a sword, that instrument is mentioned as the symbol of the right of punishment, and, as many infer from this passage, of the right of capital punishment. "Insignis locus

ad jus gladii comprobandum; nain si Dominus magistratum armando gladii quoque usum illi mandavit, quoties sontes capitali poL-ria vindicat, exercendo Dei ultionem, ejus mandatia obsequitur. Contendunt igitur curn Deo qui sanguinem nocentium hominum effundi nefas esse putant." Calvin.

VERSE 5. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience' sake. That is, subjection to magistrates is not only a civil duty enforced by penal statutes, but also a religious duty, and part of our obedience to God. For wrath, i. e., from fear of punishment. For conscience' sake, i. e., out of regard to God, from conscientious motives. In like manner, Paul "enforces all relative and social duties on religious grounds. Children are to obey their parents, because it is right in the sight of God; and servants are to be obedient to their master, as unto Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, Eph. vi. 1, 5, 6.

VERSE 6. Fur, for this cause, pay ye tribute also. This verse may be connected, by the words (oca r^ro) rendered for this cause, with the preceding, thus, 'Wherefore (i. e., for conscience sake,") ve should pay tribute also.' But it is better to consider this clause as containing an inference from the foregoing exhi bition of the nature and design of civil government: 'Since government is constituted for the benefit of society, for the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of those that do well, ye should cheerfully pay the contributions requisite for its support.'

For thei/ are the ministers of Gml, attending continually on this vert/ thiny. This clause introduces another reason for the payment of tribute. T/K'i/, not the tax-gatherers, but oi doyMTS', the rulers, to whom the tribute is due. Magistrates are' not onlv appointed for the public good, but they are the ministers of (lod, and consequently it is his will that we should contribute whatever is necessary to enable them to discharge their duty. The word (tet-vutrfoi) rendered ministers, means public servants, men appointed for any public work, civil or religious. Amonir the Greek democratical states, especially at Athens, those persons were particularly so called, who were required to perform some public service at their own expense. It is used in Scripture in a general sense, for servants or minis ters, Kom. xv. 10, Ileb. i. 7, viii. 2. The words ei- O-'JTO TO^TO, to this very tliiny, may refer to tax-gathering. The magistrates are divinely commissioned, or authorized to collect tribute. This is necessary to the support of government; and govern ment being a divine institution, God, in ordaining the end, has thereby ordained the means. It is because magistrates, in the collection of taxes, act as the faiuutfoi feoit, the executive officers of G-od, that we are bound to pay them. Others make the a?JTO rorJTO refer to the hiTouofia, or service of God, which is implied in magistrates being called fccTO'jfrfoL 'They are tha ministers of God attending constantly to their ministry.' The former interpretation is the more consistent with the context.

VERSE 7. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to ivhom honour. ' Such being the will of God? and such the benevolent design of civil government, render to magistrates (and to all others) what properly belongs to them, whether pecuniary contribution, reverence, or honour/ The word all seems, from the context, to have special reference to all in authority, though it is not necessary to confine it to such per sons exclusively. The word ((fo^o-) tribute is applied properly " to land and capitation tax; and (rs),o^) to the imposts levied on merchandise. The words (<^6,9oc) fear, and (T^/^) honour, are generally considered in this connection as differing only in degree; the former expressing the reverence to superiors, the latter the respect to equals.

VERSE 8. Owe no man any thing, but to love one another, &c, <\ That is, acquit yourselves of all obligations, except love, which is a debt that must remain ever due. This is the common, and' considering the context, which abounds with commands, the most natural interpretation of this passage. Others, however, take the verb (otpsttsTs) as in the indicative, instead of the imperative mood, and understand the passage thus: 'Ye owej no man any thing but love (which includes all other duties,) for he that loves another fulfils the law.' This gives a good sense, when this verse is taken by itself; but viewed in connection with those which precede and follow, the common interpretation is much more natural. | Besides, "the indicative would require J ojbdsui oudev, and not p^d^l tj.^dsu. The use of the subjective negative shows that a command is intended." Meyer. The idea which a cursory reader might be disposed to attach tof these words, in considering them as a direction not to contract;! pecuniary debts, is not properly expressed by them; although! the prohibition, in its spirit, includes the incurring of such| obligations, when we have not the certain prospect of discharg-j ing them. The command, however, is, 'Acquit yourselves of' since he that loves another fulfils the law.'* He that loveth another hath fulfilled (TTSTrtyfxuxs) the law. It is already done.

relating to our social duties, is attained when we love our neighbour as ourselves.

VERSE 9. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,^ Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other com mandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love tliy neighbour as thyself. This verse is evidently a confirmation of the declaration at the close of the preceding one, that love includes all our social duties. This is further confirmed in the following verse.

VERSE 10. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour, therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. That is, as love delights in the happiness of its object, it effectually prevents us from injuring those we lovvi, and, consequently, leads us to fulfil all the law requires, because the law requires nothing which is not con ducive to the best interests of our fellow-men, lie, therefore, who loves his neighbour with the same sincerity that he loves himself, and consequently treats him as he would wish, under similar circumstances, to be treated by him, will fulfil all that the law enjoins; hence the whole law is comprehended in this one command, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

VERSE 11. And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep; for now is our salvation nearer than, wlien we believed. From this verse to the end of the chapter,

* Amare; debitum immortale. Si amabitis, nil debitis nam amor implet legem. Amare, libertas est. — Bengel. Argute et eleganter dictum: dilectionis debitum et semper solvitur et semper manet. — Wetstcin.

A grateful mind,

By owing owes not, and still pays, at once Indebted and discharged. — Milton's Paradise Lost, IV. 55.

Paul exhorts his readers to discharge the duties alreadv enjoined, and urges on them to live a holy and exemplary life. The consideration by which this exhortation is enforced, is, that the night is far spent, and that the day is at hand, the time of deliverance is fast approaching. The words (xat TOUTO) rendered and that, are by many considered as elliptical, and the word (ro^Zrs) do is supplied; 'And this do.' The demon strative pronoun, however, is frequently used to mark the importance of the connection between two circumstances for the case in hand, (Passow, Vol. II. p. 319.) and is, therefore, often equivalent to the phrases, and indeed, the more, &c. So in this case, ' We must discharge our various duties, and that knowing,' &c., i. e., 'the rather, because we know,' &c.; com pare Ileb. xi. 12, 1 Cor. vi. 6, Eph. ii. 8. Knoiving the time, i. e., considering the nature and character of the period in which we now live. The original word (xatrioz) does not mean time in the general sense, but a portion of time considered as appropiate, as fixed, as short, &c. Paul immediately explains himself by adding, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep; it was the proper time to arouse themselves from their slumbers, and, shaking off all slothfulness, to address them selves earnestly to work. For now rs our salvation nearer than when we believed. This is the reason why it is time to be up and active, salvation is at hand. There are three leading inter pretations of this clause. The first is, that it means that the time of salvation, or special favour to the Gentiles, and of the destruction of the Jews, was fast approaching. So Hammond, Whitby, and many others. But for this there is no foundation in the simple meaning of the words, nor in the context. Paul evidently refers to something of more general and permanent interest than the overthrow of the Jewish nation, and the con sequent freedom of the Gentile converts from their persecutions. The night that was far spent, was not the night of sorrow arising from Jewish bigotry; and the day that was at hand was something brighter and better than deliverance from its power. A second interpretation very generally received of late is, that the reference is to the second advent of Christ. It is assumed that the early Christians, and even the inspired apos tles, were under the constant impression that Christ was to appear in person for the establishment of his kingdom, before that generation passed away. This assumption is founded on such passages as the following: Phil. iv. 5, "The Lord is at hand;" 1 Thess. iv. 17, "We that are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them to meet the Lord in the air;" 1 Cor. xv. 51, "We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed," &c. With regard to this point, we may remark,

1. That neither the early Christians nor the apostles knew when the second advent of Christ was to take place. " But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, nor the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noe were, so shall the coming of the Son of man be," Matt. xxiv. 3(J, 37, "They (the apostles) asked of him, saying. Lord, wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel? And lie said unto them, It is riot for you to know the times or the seasons which the Father hath put in his own power," Acts i. G, 7. "But of the times and seasons, brethren, ye have no need that 1 write unto you; for ye yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night," 1 Thess. v. 1, 2.

2. Though they knew not when it was to be, they knew that it was not to happen immediately, nor until a great apostacv had occurred. "Now we beseech you, brethren, by (or concerning) the coming of the Lord Jesus, and our gathering together to him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind... as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by anv means: for that da?/ shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed," &c., 2 Thess. ii. 1 — 3; and vcr. 5, "Remember ye not, that when I was yet with you, I told you these things?" Besides this distinct assertion, that the second advent of Christ was not to occur before the revela tion of the man of sin, there are several other predictions in the writings of Paul, which necessarily imply his knowledge of the fact, that the day of judgment was not immediately at hand, 1 Tim. iv. 1 — 5, Rom. xi. 25. The numerous prophecies of the Old Testament relating to the future conversion of the Jews, and various other events, were known to the apostles, and pre cluded the possibility of their believing that the world was to come to an end before those prophecies were fulfilled 3. We are not to understand the expressions, day of the Lord, llie appearing of CJirist, the coming of the Son of man, in all cases in the same way. The day of the Lord is a very familiar expression in the Scriptures to designate any time of the special manifestation of the divine presence, either for judg ment or mercy; see Ezek. xiii. 5, Joel i. 15, Isa. ii. 12, xiii. 6, 9. So also God or Christ is said to come to any person or place, when he makes any remarkable exhibition of his power or grace. Hence the Son of man was to come for the destruction of Jerusalem, before the people of that generation all perished; and the summons of death is sometimes represented as the coming of Christ to judge the soul. What is the meaning of such expressions must be determined by the context, in each particular case. 4. It cannot, therefore, be inferred from such declarations as " the day of the Lord is at hand;" " the coming of the Lord draweth nigh;" "the judge is at the door," &c., that those who made them supposed that the second advent and final judgment were to take place immediately. They expressly assert the contrary, as has just been shown. 5. The situation of the early Christians was, in this respect, similar to ours. They believed that Christ was to appear the second time with out sin unto salvation; but when this advent was to take place, they did not know. They looked and longed for the appearing of the great God their Saviour, as we do now; and the prospect of this event operated upon them as it should do upon us, as a constant motive to watchfulness and diligence, that we may be found of him in peace. There is nothing, therefore, in the Scriptures, nor in this immediate context, which requires us to suppose that Paul intended to say that the time of the second advent was at hand, when he tells his readers that their salva tion was nearer than when they believed.

The third and most common, as well as the most natural inter pretation of this passage is, that Paul meant simply to remind them that the time of deliverance wras near; that the difficulties and sins with which they had to contend, would soon be dis persed as the shades and mists of night before the rising day. The salvation, therefore, here intended, is the consummation of the work of Christ in their deliverance from this present evil world, and introduction into the purity and blessedness of heaven. Eternity is just at hand, is the solemn consideratioD

VERSE 12. The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light. The general sentiment of this verse is very obvious. Night or darkness is the common emblem of sin and sorrow; day or light, that of knowledge, purity, and happiness. The meaning of the first clause therefore is, that the time of sin and sorrow is nearly over, that of holiness and happiness is at hand. The particular form and application of this general sentiment depends, however, on the interpretation given to the preceding verse. If that verse refers to the destruction of Jeru salem, then Paul means to say, that the night of persecution was nearly gone, and the day of peace and prosperity to the Gentile churches was at hand. But if ver. 11 refers to final salvation, then this verse means, that the sins and sorrows of this life will soon be over, and the day of eternal blessedness is about to dawn. The latter view is to be preferred.

Paul continues this beautiful figure through the verse. There fore let us cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light. That is, let us renounce those things which need to be concealed, and clothe ourselves with those which arc suited to the light. The works of darkness are those works which men are accustomed to commit in the dark, or which suit the dark; and armour of light means those virtues and good deeds which men are not ashamed of, because they will bear to be seen. Paul probably used the word (orr///) armour, instead of works, because these virtues constitute the offensive and defensive weapons with which we are here to contend against sin and evil; see Eph. vi. 11. The words d~on'#£<7#ar and Iw'jzat'JfjL! suggest the idea of clothing. V>TC are to cast off one set of garments, and to put on another. The clothes which belong to the night are to be cast aside, and we are to array ourselves in those suited to the day.

VERSE 13. Let us walk honestly as in the day: not in rioting and drunkenness; not in chambering and wantonness; not in strife and envying. This verse is an amplification of the pre ceding, stating some of those works of darkness which we are to put off; as ver. 14 states what is the armour o-f light which we are to put on. The word (e&fffflfJidv&G) rendered honestly, means becomingly, properly. There are three classes of sins specified in this verse, to each of which two words are appro priated, viz., intemperance, impurity, and discord. Rioting and drunkenness belong to the first. The word (XCOJULOZ) appropri ately rendered rioting, is used both in reference to the disor derly religious festivals kept in honour of Bacchus, and to the common boisterous carousing of intemperate young men, (see Passow, Vol. I., p. 924.) The words chambering and wanton ness, include all kinds of uncleanriess; and strife and envying, all kinds of unholy emulation and discord.

VERSE 14. But put ye on the Lord Jesus Clirist, i. e., be as he was. To put on Christ, signifies to be intimately united to him, so that he, and not we, may appear, Gal. iii. 27: 'Let not your own evil deeds be seen, (i. e., do not commit such,) but let what Christ was, appear in all your conduct, as effectually as if clothed with the garment of his virtues.'

And make no provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts theieof. That is, let it not be your care to gratify the flesh. ByyZ«?s7i, in this passage, is perhaps generally understood the body; so that the prohibition is confined to the vicious indulgence of the sensual appetites. But there seems to be no sufficient reason for this restriction. As the word is constantly used by Paul for whatever is corrupt, and in the preceding verse the sins of envy and contention are specially mentioned, it may be under stood more generally, ' Do not indulge the desires of your cor rupt nature.'

1. Civil government is a divine institution, i. e., it is the will of God that it should exist, and be respected and obeyed,

2. While 'government is of God, the form is of men.' God has never enjoined any one form obligatory on all communi ties; but has simply laid down certain principles, applicable to rulers and subjects, under every form in which governments exist, vs. 1 — 7.

3. The obedience which the Scriptures command us to render to our rulers is not unlimited; there are cases in which disobe dience is a duty. This is evident, first, from the very nature of the case. The command to obey magistrates is, from its nature, a command to obey them as magistrates in the exercise of their rightful authority. They are not to be obeyed as priests or as parents, but as civil rulers. No one doubts that the precept, "Children, obey your parents in all things," is a' command to obey them in the exercise of their rightful parental authority, and imposes no obligation to implicit and passive obedience. A parent who should claim the power of a sove reign over his children, would have no right to their obedience. The case is still plainer with regard to the command, "Wives, submit to your own husbands." Secondly, from the fact that the same inspired men who enjoin, in such general terms, obedience to rulers, themselves uniformly and openly disobeyed them whenever their commands were inconsistent with other and higher obligations. " We ought to obey God rather than men," was the principle which the early Christians avowed, and on which they acted. They disobeyed the Jewish and heathen authorities, whenever they required them to do anything con trary to the will of God. There are cases, therefore, in which disobedience is a duty. How far the rightful authority of rulers extends, the precise point at which the obligation to obedience ceases, must often be a difficult question; and each case must be decided on its own merits. The same difficulty exists in fixing the limits of the authority of parents over their children, husbands over their wives, masters over their servants. This, however, is a theoretical rather than a practical difficulty. The genera! principles on which the question in regard to any given case is to be decided are sufficiently plain. No command to do anything morally wrong can be binding; nor can any which transcends the rightful authority of the power whence it eman ates. What that rightful authority is, must be determined by the institutions and laws of the land, or from prescription and usage, or from the nature and design of the office with which the magistrate is invested. The right of deciding on all these points, and determining where the obligation to obedience ceases, and the duty of resistance begins, must, from the nature of the case, rest with the subject, and not with the ruler. The apostles and early Christians decided this point for them selves, and did not leave the decision with the Jewish or Roman authorities. Like all other questions of duty, it is to be decided on our responsibility to God and our fellow-men, vs. 1 — 7.

4. The design of civil government is not to promote the advantage of rulers, but of the ruled. They are ordained and invested with authority, to be a terror to evil doers, and a praise to them that do well. They are the ministers of God for this end, and are appointed for "this very thing." On this ground our obligation to obedience rests, and the obligation ceases when this design is systematically, constantly, and noto riously disregarded. Where unfaithfulness on the part of the government exists, or where the form of it is incompatible with the design of its institution, the governed must have a right to remedy the evil. But they cannot have the moral right to remedy one evil, by the production of a greater. And, there fore, as there are few greater evils than instability and uncer tainty in governments, the cases in which revolutions are justifiable must be exceedingly rare, vs. 3 — 7.

5. The proper sphere of civil government is the civil and social relations of men, and their temporal welfare; conscience, and of course religion, are beyond its jurisdiction, except so far as the best interests of civil society are necessarily connected •with them. What extent of ground this exception covers, ever has been, and probably will ever remain a matter of dispute. Still it is to be remembered, that it is an exception; religion and morality, as such, are not within the legitimate sphere of the civil authority. To justify the interference of the civil government, therefore, in any given case, with these important subjects, an exception must be made out. It must be shown that an opinion or a religion is not only false, but that its pre valence is incompatible with the rights of those members of the community who are not embraced within its communion, before the civil authority can be authorized to interfere for its sup pression. It is then to be suppressed, not as a religion, but as a public nuisance. God has ordained civil government for the promotion of the welfare of men as members of the same civil society; and parental government, and the instruction and dis cipline of the church, for their moral and religious improve ment. And the less interference there is between these two great institutions, in the promotion of their respective objects, the better. We do not find in the New Testament any com mands addressed to magistrates with regard to the suppression of heresies or the support of the truth; nor, on the other hand, do we meet with any directions to the church to interfere with matters pertaining to the civil government, vs. 3 — 6.

6. The discharge of all the social and civil duties of life is to the Christian a matter of religious obligation, vs. 5 — 7.

1. The Christian religion is adapted to all states of society and all forms of civil government. As the Spirit of God, when it enters any human heart, leaves unmolested what is peculiar to its individual character, as far as it is innocent, and effects the reformation of what is evil, not by violence, but by a sweetly constraining influence; so the religion of Christ, when it enters any community of men, does not assail their form of govern ment, whether despotic or free; and if there is anything in their institutions inconsistent with its spirit, it is changed by its silent operation on the heart and conscience, rather than by direct denunciation. It lias thus, without rebellion or violent convulsions, curbed the exercise of despotic power, and wrought the abolition of slavery throughout the greater part of Christen dom, vs. 1 — 14.

2. The gospel is equally hostile to tyranny and anarchy. It teaches rulers that they are ministers of God for the public good; and it teaches subjects to be obedient to magistrates, not only for fear, but also for conscience' sake, ver. 5.

3. God is to be recognised as ordering the affairs of civil society: "lie rcmoveth kings, and he scttcth up kings;" by him "kings reign, and princes decree justice." It is enough, therefore, to secure the obedience of the Christian, that, in the providence of God, he finds the power of government lodged in certain hands. The early Christians would have been in con stant perplexity, had it been incumbent on them, amidst the frequent poisonings and assassinations of the imperial palace, the tumults of the pretorian guards, and the proclamation by contending armies of rival candidates, to decide on the individual who had de jure the power of the sword, before they could con scientiously obey, vs. 1 — 5.

4. When rulers become a terror to the good, and a praise to them that do evil, they may still be tolerated and obeyed, not however, of right, but because the remedy may be worse than the disease, vs. 3, 4.

5. Did genuine Christian love prevail, it would secure the right discharge, not only of the duties of rulers towards their subjects, and of subjects towards their rulers, but of all the rela tive social duties of life; for he that loveth another fulfilleth the law, vs. 7, 8.

6. The nearness of eternity should operate on all Christiana as a motive to purity and dcvotedness to God. The night is far spent, the day is at hand; now is our salvation nearer than when we believed, vs. 13, 14.

7. All Christian duty is included in putting on the Lord Jesus; in being like him, having that similarity of temper and conduct which results from being intimately united to him by the Holy Spirit, ver. 14.

As in chapter xii., Paul had insisted principally upon moral and religious duties, and in chapter xiii., on those of a political character, he here treats particularly of the duties of church members towards each other, in relation to matters not binding on the conscience. There are two points specially presented: the first is the manner in which scrupulous Christians, who make conscience of matters of indifference, are to be treated, y- 1 — 12; and the second, the manner in which those who are strong in faith should use their Christian liberty, vs. 13 — 23.

SCRUPULOUS Christians, whose consciences are weak, are to be kindly received, and not harshly condemned, ver. 1. This direction the apostle enforces in reference to those who were scrupulous as to eating particular kinds of food, and the pro priety of neglecting the sacred days appointed in the law of Moses. Such persons are not to be condemned: 1. Because this weakness is not inconsistent with piety; notwithstanding their doubts on these points, God has received them, ver. 3. 2. Because one Christian has no right to judge another, (except where Christ has expressly authorized it, and given him the rule of judgment;) to his own master he stands or falls, ver. 4. o. Because such harsh treatment is unnecessary; God can and will preserve such persons, notwithstanding their feebleness, ver. 4. 4. Because they act religiously, or out of regard to God, in this matter; and, therefore, live according to the great Christian principle, that no man liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself, but whether he lives or dies, belongs to God, vs. G — 0. On these grounds we should abstain from condemn ing or treating contemptuously our weaker brethren, remember ing that we are all to stand before the judgment-seat of Christ,

As to the use of Christian liberty, the apostle teaches that it is not to be given up or denied; that is, we aie not to make things sinful which are in themselves indifferent, ver. 14. Hut it does not follow, that because a thing is not wrong in itself, it is right {'or us to indulge in it. Our liberty is to be asserted; but it is to be exercised in such a way as not to injure others. We must not put a stumbling-block in our brother's way, ver. 12. This consideration of others, in the use of our liberty, is enforced: 1. From the great law of love. Il is inconsistent with Christian charity, for our own gratification, to injure a brother for whom Christ died, ver. 15. '2. From a regard to the honour of religion. We must not cause that which is good to be evil spoken of, ver. llj. o. From the consideration that religion does not consist in such things, vs. IT, FS. 4. Because we are bound to promote the peace and edification of the church, ver. F.*. 5. Though the things in question may be in themselves indifferent, it is morally wrong to indulge in them to the injury of others, vs. 2U, 21. 0. The course enjoined by the apostle requires no concession of principle, or adoption of error. We can retain our full belief of the indifference of things which God has not pronounced sinful; but those who have not our faith, cannot act upon it, and therefore should not be encouraged so to do, vs. 22, 23.

VEKSE 1..777m that is weak in faith receive, but not to doubt ful disputations. This verse contains the general direction that weak and scrupulous brethren are to be kindly received, and not harshly condemned. Who these weak brethren were, and what was the nature of their scruples, is matter of doubt. Some say they were Jewish converts, who held to the continued obligation of the ceremonial law. But to this it is objected, that they abstained from all flesh (ver. 2,) and refused to drink wine (ver. 21;) things not prohibited in the law of Moses. Othors think they were persons who scrupled about the use of such flesh only as had been offered in sacrifice to idols, and of the wine employed in libation to false gods. But for this limitation there is no ground in the context. Eichhorn, Einleitung III. p. 222, supposes that they were the advocates, of Gentile birth, of the ascetic school of the new Pythagorean philosophy, which had begun to prevail among the heathen, and probably to a certain extent among the Jews. But it is plain that they held to the continued authority of the Jewish law, which converts from among the heathen would not be likely to do. The most probable opinion is, that they were a scrupulous class of Jewish Christians; perhaps of the school of the Essencs, who were more strict and abstemious than the Mosaic ceremonial required. Asceticism, as a form of self-right eousness and will-worship, was one of the earliest, most exten sive and persistent heresies in the church. But there is nothing inconsistent with the assumption that the weak brethren here spoken of were scrupulous Jewish Christians. Josephus says, that some of the Jews at Rome lived on fruits exclusively, from fear of eating something unclean. Weak in faith, i. e., weak as to faith (xiffrst.) Faith here means, persuasion of the truth; a man may have a strong persuasion as to certain truths, and a very weak one as to others. Some of the early Christians were, no doubt, fully convinced that Jesus was the Messiah, and yet felt great doubts whether the distinction between clean and unclean meats was entirely done away. This was certainly a great defect of Christian character, and arose from the want of an intelligent and firm conviction of the gratuitous nature of justification, and of the spirituality of the gospel. Since, however, this weakness was not inconsistent with sincere devo tion to Christ, such persons were to be received. The word (itooafaftfidyofjiai) rendered receive, has the general signification^ to take to one-self; and this is its meaning here: 'Him that is weak in faith, take to yourselves as a Christian brother, treat him kindly;' see Acts xxviii. 2. Rom. xv. 7, Philemon vs. 15, 17.

There is much more doubt as to the meaning of the words (it^ ere oeaxcfia?!^ dea)>oftattM\>) translated not to doubtful disputations. The former of the two important words of this clause means, the faculty of discrimination, \ Cor. xiii. 10; the act of discerning, Ileb. v. 14, and then, dijudication, judgment. It is said also to signify doubt or inward conflict; see the use of the verb in chap. iv. 2>>. Jt is taken in this souse in our version, not to tlte doubt fulness of Jix[>utex, riot for the purpose of doubtful disputation. That is, not so as to give rise to disputes on doubtful matters. Luther (mid verwirret die (Jrwisscn nicht.) and many others take d:v.'/<>'.<7£^ in the sense of doubt ^ and refer the dtaAoftcr/we to the weak brethren: 'Not so as to awaken doubts of thought, i. e., scruples.' Although the verb o'.(/.-/j>:^ico. in the passive, often means to hesitate or doubt, the noun o'.(/.zii'.fn~ is not used in that sense, cither in the classics or in the Xrw Testament. It is therefore better to take the word in its ordinary sense, which gives a. meaning to the passage suited to the context, not to the judging of thoughts; i. e., not presuming to sit in judg ment on the opinions of your brethren. Grotius: " Non sumentes vobis dijudicandas ipsorum cogitationes." This is the injunction which is enforced in the following verses.

VERSE 2. For one bcUevetli lie may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs — o~ tt.kv ~'.(7~^'jit ^f/j's?v;ravr# docs not mean, one believeth he may eat all things; much less, he that believeth eats all things, but, one has confidence to eat all things. Instead of oc //£v being followed by oc oz, one cats all things, another eats herbs, Paul says, b os d.vd^ow, he who is weak eateth herbs. This is an illustration of the weakness of faith to which the apostle refers in ver. 1. It was a scrupu- lousness about the use of things considered as unclean, And with regard to sacred days, ver. 5. There were two sources whence the early Christian church was disturbed by the question about meats. The first, and by far the most important, was the natural prejudices of the Jewish converts. It is not a matter of surprise that, educated as they had been in a strict regard for the Mosaic law, they found it difficult to enter at once into the full liberty of the gospel, and disencumber their consciences of all their early opinions. Even the apostles were slow in shaking them off; and the church in Jerusalem seems to have long continued in the observance of a great part of the ceremo nial law. These scruples were not confined to the use of meats pronounced unclean in the Old Testament, but, as appears from the Epistles to the Corinthians, extended to partaking of anything which had been offered to an idol; and, in these latter scruples, some even of the Gentile converts may have joined. The second source of trouble on this subject was less prevalent and less excusable. It was the influence of the mystic ascetic philosophy of the East, which had developed itself among the Jews, in the peculiar opinions of the Essenes, and which, among the Christian churches, particularly those of Asia Minor, pro duced the evils which Paul describes in his Epistles to the Colossians (chap. ii. 10—23,) and to Timothy (1 Tim. iv. 1—8,) and which subsequently gave rise to all the errors of Gnosti cism. There is no satisfactory evidence that the persons to whom Paul refers in this passage were under the influence of this philosophy. The fact that they abstained from all meat, as seems to be intimated in this verse, may have arisen from the constant apprehension of eating meat which, after having been presented in sacrifice, was sold in the market-place, or which had in some other way been rendered unclean. Every thing in the context is consistent with the supposition that Jewish scruples were the source of the difficulty; and as these were by far the most common cause, no other need be here assumed.

VERSE 3. Let not him that eateth despise 1dm that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. There is mutual forbearance to be exercised in relation to this subject. The strong are riot to despise the weak as superstitious and imbecile; nor the weak to condemn those who disregard their scruples. Points of indifference are not to be allowed to disturb the harmony of Christian fellow ship. For Crod Jtatk received him; i. e., God has recognised him as a Christian, and received him into his kingdom. This reason is not designed to enforce merely the latter of the two duties here enjoined, but is applied to both. As God does not make eating or not eating certain kinds of food a condition of acceptance, Christians ought not to allou it to interfere with their communion as brethren. The Jewish converts were per haps quite as much disposed to condemn the Gentile Christians, as the latter were to despise the Christian Jews; Paul there fore frames his admonition so as to reach both classes. It appears, however, from the first verse, and from the whole con text, that the Gentiles were principally intended.

VERSE 4. Wlio art ikon that jmlj^t another man s servant? to his own master he xtan<lsth or faUcth. If God has not made the point in question a term of communion, we have no right to make it a ground of condemnation. We have no right to exer cise the oilice of judge over the servant of another. This is the eccond reason for mutual forbearance with regard to such mat ters as divided the Jewish and Gentile converts. It cannot fail to be remarked how differently the apostle speaks of the same things under different circumstances. lie who circumcised! Timothy, who conformed in many things to the law of Moses, and to the Jews became a Jew, and who here exhorts Christians to regard their external observances as matters of indifference, resisted to the uttermost, as soon as these things were urged as matters of importance, or were insisted upon as necessary to acceptance with God. He would not allow Titus to be circum cised, nor give place even for an hour to false brethren, who had come in privily to act as spies. Gal. ii. 3, 5. He warned the Galatians, that if they were circumcised, Christ would profit them nothing; that they renounced the whole method of gra tuitous justification, and forfeited its blessings, if they sought acceptance on any such terms. How liberal and how faithful was the apostle! He would concede every thing, and become all things to all men, where principle was not at stake; but when it was, he would concede nothing for a moment. AV hat

/might be safely granted, if asked and given as a matter cf /indifference, became a fatal apostacy when demanded as a smatter of necessity or a condition of salvation.

To his own master he standeth or falleth, i. e., it belongs to his own master to decide his case, to acquit or to condemn. These terms are often used in this judicial sense, Ps. i. 5, Ixxvi. 7, Luke xxi. 36, Rev. vi. 17. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand; i. e., he shall stand, or be accepted, for God has the right and the will to make him stand, that is, to acquit and save him. This clause seems designed to urge a further reason for forbearance and kindness towards those who differ from us on matters of indifference. However weak a man's faith may be, if he is a Christian, he should be recognised and treated as such; for his weakness is not inconsistent with his acceptance with God, and therefore is no ground or necessity for our proceeding against him with severity. The objects of discipline are the reformation of offenders and the purification of the church; but neither of these objects requires the condemnation of those brethren whom God has received. " God is able to make him stand;" he has not only the power, but the disposition and determina tion. Compare chap. xi. 23, "For God is able to graft them in again." The interpretation given above, according to which standing and falling are understood judicially, is the one com monly adopted. It is however objected, that justifying, causing to stand in judgment, is not an act of power, but of grace. On this ground, standing and falling are taken to refer to continu ing or falling away from the Christian life. God is able, not withstanding their weakness, to cause his feeble children to persevere. But this is against the context. The thing con demned is unrighteous judgments. The brethren are not responsible to each other, or to the church, for their scruples. God is the Lord of the conscience. To him they must answer. Before him they stand or fall.

VERSE 5. One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day alike. Kn>.vz> -qnknu.v ~a<> -fjusfiav (s&ai,} judges one day (to be) before another, (i. e., better;) xftivse ~<1aav fjfJLSpav (Cwfu fjuJnai/) to be a day, and nothing mere. He has the same judgment (or estimation) of every day. As the law of Moses not only made a distinction between meats as clean and unclean, but also prescribed the observance of certain days as religious festivals, the Jewish converts were as scrupulous with regard to this latter point as the former. Some Chris tians, therefore, thought it incumbent on them to observe these days; others were of a contrary opinion. Both were to be tole rated. The veneration of these days was a weakness; but still it was not a vital matter, and therefore should not be allowed to disturb the harmony of Christian intercourse, or the peace of the church. It is obvious from the context, and from such parallel passages as Gal. iv. 10, "Ye observe days, and months,! and times, and years," and Col. ii. 1G, "Let no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of Sabbath days," that Paul has reference to the Jewish festivals, and therefore his language cannot properly be applied to the Christian Sabbath. The sentiment of the pas sage is this, ' One man observes the Jewish festivals, another man does not.' Such we know was the fact in the apostolic I church, even among those who agreed in the observance of the * first day of de week.

Let every man be fully persuaded in his oivn mind. The principle which the apostle enforces in reference to this case, is the same as that which he enjoined in relation to the other, viz., that one man should not be forced to act according to another man's conscience, but every one should be satisfied in his own mind, and be careful not to do what he thought wrong.

VERSE G. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. lie that eateth, eateth to the Lord, &c. That is, both parties are actuated by religious motives in what they do; they regulate their conduct by a regard to the will of God, and therefore, although some, from weakness or ignorance, may err as to the rule of duty, they are not to be despised or cast cut as evil. The strong should not contemn the scrupulous, nor the scrupulous be censorious towards the strong. This is a fourth argument in favour of the mutual forbearance enjoined in the first verse, lie that eateth, eateth to the Lord; for he giveth God thanks, &c. That is, he who disregards the Mosaic distinction between clean and unclean meats, and uses in liscrirainately the common articles of food, acts religiously in so doing, as is evident from his giving God thanks, lie could not delibe rately thank God for what he supposed God had forbidden him to use. In like manner, he that abstains from certain meats, does it religiously, for he also giveth thanks to God; which implies that he regards himself as acting agreeably to the divine will. The Lord is he who died and rose again, that he might be Lord both of the living and the dead. It is to him the believer is responsible, as to the Lord of his inner life.

VERSE 7. For none of us livetli to himself, and no man dieth to himself; ka>j7w> in dependence on himself. This verse is an amplification and confirmation of the preceding. The principle on which both the classes of persons just referred to acted, is a true Christian principle. No Christian considers himself as his own master, or at liberty to regulate his conduct according to his own will, or for his own ends; he is the servant of Christ, and therefore endeavours to live according to his will and for his glory. They, therefore, who act on this principle, are to be regarded and treated as true Christians, although they may differ as to what the will of God, in particular cases, requires. No man dieth to himself, i. e., death as well as life must be left in the hands of God, to be directed by his will and for his glory. The sentiment is, ' We are entirely his, having no authority over our life or death.'

VERSE 8. For whether ive live, we live unto the Lord; or whetlier we die, ive die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lords. The same sentiment as in the pre ceding verse, rather more fully and explicitly stated. In ver. 7, Paul had stated, negatively, that the Christian docs not live according to his own will, or for his own pleasure; he here states, affirmatively, that he does live according to the will of Christ, and for his glory. This being the case, he is a true Christian; he belongs to Christ, and should be so recognised and treated. It is very obvious, especially from the following verse, which speaks of death and resurrection, that Christ is intended by the word Lord, in this verse. It is for Christ, and in subjection to his will, that every Christian endeavours to regulate his heart, his conscience, arid his life. This is the profoundcst homage the creature can render to his Creator; and as it is the service which the Scriptures require us tc render to the Redeemer, it of necessity supposes that Christ is God. This is rendered still plainer by the interchange, through out the passage (vs. 6 — 9,) of the terms Lord and God: 'lie that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks. We live unto the Lord; we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ died and rose, that he might be the Lord,' &C. It is clear that, to the apostle's mind, the idea that Christ is Cod was perfectly familiar. Whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. We are not our own, but Christ's, 1 Cor. vi. IT'. This right of possession, and the consequent duty of devotion and obedi ence, are not founded on creation, but on redemption. We are Christ's, because he has bought us with a price.

VERSE 9. For to this end Christ both di<'d, and rose, and revived,* that he ml;/ht be the Lord both of the dead and living. The dominion which Christ, as Mediator or Redeemer, exercises over his people, ami which they gladly recognise, is therefore referred to his death and resurrection. J5y his death lie pur chased them for his own. and by his resurrection he attained to that exalted station which he now occupies as Lord over all, and received those gifts which enable him to exercise as Medi ator this universal dominion. The exaltation and dominion of Christ are frequently represented in the Scriptures as the reward of his sufferings: "Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow," &c. Phil, ii. 8, 9. This authority of Christ over his people is not con fined to this world, but extends beyond the grave, lie is Lord both of the dead and the living.

* The common text reads *-// i.^r'-.^n K.-JI ^virrn *** i.v;£»rfv; most corrected editions real H.ZI uTr&w* m ^-.^-.v: and some omit K.-J.I he 1'ore I'.jrld^vs The words **<..vimi are omitted in the MSS. A. C., in the Coptic, Ethiopia, Syriac, and Armenian versions, and by many of the Fathers. They are rejected by Erasmus, Benpjel, Schmidt. Knapp, Lachrnann, arid others. The words **} uvt^o-w are omitted by some few MSS. and Fathers: K.-JU l?.vw are read in MSS. A. C. and in forty-four others. They are adopted in the Complutensian edi tion, and in cho.-^ of Mi.l, Bengel, Wetstein, Griesbach, Knapp, Lachmann, &o. These diversities do not materially affect the sense. The words U«O-T» aud uv'.faTw have very much the appearance of explanatory glosses.

VERSE 10. But why dost thou judge tJiy brother? or why dost thou set at naught thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ.* In this and the following verses, to the 18th, Paul applies his previous reasoning to the case in hand. If a man is our brother, if God has received him, if he acts from a sincere desire to do the divine will, he should not be condemned, though he may think certain things right which we think wrong; nor should he be despised if he tram mels his conscience with unnecessary scruples. The former of these clauses relates to scrupulous Jewish Christians; the latter to the Gentile converts. The last member of the verse applies to both classes. As we are all to stand before the judgmentseat of Christ, as he is our sole and final judge, we should not usurp his prerogative, or presume to condemn those whom he has received.

VERSE 11. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess. This quotation is from Isa. xlv. 23, "I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, that unto me every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall swear." The apostle, it will be perceived, docs not adhere to the words of the passage which he quotes, but contents him self with giving the sense. As I live, being the form of an oath, is a correct exhibition of the meaning of the phrase, I have sworn by myself. And since, to swear by any being, is to recognise his po\ver and authority over us, the expressions, every tongue shall sivear, and every tongue shall confess, are of similar import. Both indeed are parallel to the clause, every knee shall bow, and are but different forms of expressing the general idea that every one shall submit to God, i. e., recognise his authority as God, the supreme ruler and judge. The apostle evidently considers the recognition of the authority of Christ as being tantamount to submission to God, and he applies without hesitation the declarations of the Old Testament in relation to

* Instead of ^.TTOU, at the close of this verse, the MSS. A. D. E. F. G. read &iyj, which is adupted by Mill, Lachmann, and Tischendorf. The common reading is supported by the great majority of the MSS., most of the ancient versions, an 1 almost all the Fathers. It is therefore retained bv most critical editors.

the universal dominion of Jehovah, in proof of the Redeemer's sovereignty. In Paul's estimation, therefore, Jesus Christ was God. This is so obvious, that commentators of all classes recognise the force of the argument hence deduced for the divinity of Christ. Luther says: " So muss Christus rechter

Gott sein, well solches vor seinem Richterstuhl geschehen." Calvin: "Est etiarn insignis locus ad stabiliendam fidem mostram de asterna Christi divinitate." Bengcl: "Christus est Deus, nam dicitur Dominus et Deus. Ipse est, cui vivimua et morimur. Ipse jurat per se ipsum." Even Koppe says, " Quae Jes. xlv. 23, de Jehova dicuntur, cadem ad Christum transfem ab apostolo, non est mirandum, cum hunc illi artissimc conjunctum cogitandum esse, perpetua sit turn Jiuhtorum, quotiescunque°de Messia loquuntur, turn imprimis Pauli ct Joams sententia." This verse may be considered as intended to con

firm the truth of the declaration at the close of the one preced ing < We shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ; for it is written, To me every knee shall bow.' And this seems the natural relation of the passage. Calvin understands tin verse, however, as designed to enforce humble submission to the judgment of Christ: 4 We should not judge others, since we are to be judged by Christ; and to his judgment we must humbly bow the knee.' This is indeed clearly implied; but it is rather an accessory idea, than the special design of the passage.

VEKSE 12. So then every one of us shall give account of him self to God. 'As, therefore, God is the supreme judge, and we are to render our account to him, we should await his decision, and not presume to act the part of judge over our brethren.'

VERSE 13. Let us not therefore jinlje one another any more; but ju.fye this rather, that no man put a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall in his brothers ivaij. After drawing the con clusion from the preceding discussion, that we should leave the office of judging in the hands of God, the apostle introduce: the second leading topic of the chapter, viz., the manner m which Christian liberty is to be exercised. He teaches that it is not enough that twe are persuaded a certain course is, in itself considered, right, in order to authorize us to pursue it. We must be careful that we do not injure others in the use of our liberty. The word (xpiw) rendered judge, means also, t* determine, to make up ones mind. Paul uses it first in the one sense, and then in the other: 'Do not judge one another, but determine to avoid giving offence.' The words (-poffxo/jt/jta and ffxdvdalov) rendered a stumbling -block and an occasion to fall, do not differ in their meaning; the latter is simply exegetical of the former.

VERSE 14. / know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 'The distinction between clean and unclean meats is no longer valid. So far the Gentile converts are right. But they should remember that those who consider the law of the Old Testament on this subject as still binding, cannot, with a good conscience, disregard it. The strong should not, therefore, do anything which would be likely to lead such persons to violate their own sense of duty.' I know and am persuaded by (in) the Lord Jesus, i. e., this knowledge and persuasion I owe to the Lord Jesus; it is not an opinion founded on my own reasonings, but a knowledge derived from divine revelation. That there is nothing unclean of itself. The word (xoivo~) rendered unclean, has this sense only in Hel lenistic Greek. It means common, and as opposed to (a^o-) holy, (i. e., separated for some special or sacred use,) it signifies impure; see Acts x. 14, 28, Mark vii. 2, &c. But to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean; i. e., though not unclean in itself, it ought not to be used by those who regard its use as unlawful. But, EI p/j, which seems here to be used in the sense of d//a; compare Matt. xii. 4, Gal. i. 19. The ordinary sense of except may, however, be retained, by restricting the reference to a part of the preceding clause: 'Nothing is unclean, except to him who esteems it to be unclean.' The simple principle here taught is, that it is wrong for any man to violate his own sense of duty. This being the case, those Jewish converts who believed the distinction between clean and unclean meats to be still in force, would commit sin in disregarding it; and, therefore, should not be induced to act contrary to their consciences.

VERSE 15. But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died. Instead of ds, but, which is found in the common text, Griesbach, Lachmann, and Tischendorf, on tlio authority of the majority of the Uncial MSS., read rdt>, for. As this verse, however, does not assign a reason for the princi ple asserted in vcr. 14, but does introduce a limitation to the practical application of that principle, the majority of com mentators and editors retain the common text. The senso obviously is, 'Though the thing is right in itself, yet if indul gence in it be injurious to our Christian brethren, that indul gence is a violation of the law of love.' This is the first consideration which the apostle urges, to enforce the exhorta tion not to put a stumbling-block in our brother's way. The word (/y/T£?r«f,) is grieved, may mean is injured. Either sense suits the context: 'If thy brother, emboldened bv thy example, is led to do what he thinks wrong, and is thus rendered misera ble,' (fcc. Or, 'If thy brother, by thy example, is injured (by being led into sin,) thou walkest uncharitably.' This use of the word, however, is foreign to the New Testament. It is a moral grievance of which the apostle speaks, a wounding of the con science. Destroy not (/ty d~6)Ju£.) These words have been variously explained. The meaning may be, 'Avoid every thing which lias a tendency to lead him to destruction.'' So I)e Brais, Bengcl, Tholuck, St nari, and manv others. ()r. w Do not injure him, or render him miserable.' So Klsner, Konpo. Flatt. \Vahl, and others. There is no material difference between these two interpretations. The former is more consistent with the com mon meaning of the original word, from whieh there is no necessity to depart. Believers ( 1 he elect) are constantly spoken ol as in danger of perdition. They are saved only, ii they con tinue steadfast unto the end. If tliey apostatize, they perish. If the Scriptures tell the people of (Jod what is the tendency of their sins, as to themselves, they may tell them what is the tendency of such sins as to others. Saints are preserved, not in despite of apostasv, but from apostasy. ' If thy brother bo aggrieved, thou doest wronu1, do not grieve or injure him.' F >r trim)) C/trixt difd. This consideration lias peculiar force. k If rhrist so loved him as to die for him, how base in you not to submit to the smallest self-denial for his welfare.' it the occasion of evil, arid so liable to censure.' Thus Calvin and moist other commentators. This supposes that the exhorta tion here given is addressed to the strong in faith. The b/jicov, however, may include both classes, and the exhortation extend to the weak as well as to the good. Your good, that special good which belongs to you as Christians, viz.. the gospel. This view is taken by Melancthon, and most of the later commenta tors, "Loedunt utrique evangclium cum rixantur de rebus non necessariis. Ita fit ut imperiti abhorreant ab evangelic cum videtur parere discordias."

VERSE 17. For the kingdom of Grod is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Grhost. This is a new reason for forbearance. No principle of duty is sacri ficed; nothing essential to religion is disregarded, for religion does not consist in external observances, but in the inward graces of the Spirit. It has already been remarked (ver. 4,) that with all his desire of peace, no one was more firm and unyielding, when any dereliction of Christian principle was required of him, than the apostle. But the case under con sideration is very different. There is no sin in abstaining from certain meats, and therefore, if the good of others require this abstinence, we are bound to exercise it. The phrase, kingdom of Grod, almost uniformly signifies the kingdom of the Messiah, under some one of its aspects, as consisting of all professing Christians, of all his own people, of glorified believers, or as existing in the heart. It is the spiritual theocracy. The theoc racy of the Old Testament was ceremonial and ritual; that of the New is inward and spiritual. Christianity, as we should Bay, does not consist in things external. Meat and drink, or rather, eating (fifuofftz) and drinking (xoatz.) The distinction between these words and fi<>Cotj.a and TtotJta, is constantly observed in Paul's epistles. Righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Crhost. These words are to be taken in their scrip tural sense. Paul does not mean to say, that Christianity con sists in morality; that the man who is just, peaceful, and cheerful, is a true Christian. This would be to contradict the whole argument of this epistle. The righteousness, peace, and joy intended, are those of which the Holy Spirit is the author. Righteousness is that which enables us to stand before God, because it satisfies the demands of the law. It is the righteous. ness of faith, both objective and subjective; peace is the con cord between God and the soul, between reason and conscience, between the heart and our fellow-men. And the joy is the joy of salvation; that joy which only those who are in the fellow ship of the Holy Ghost ever can experience.

VERSE 18. For he that in these things serveth Christ, is acceptable to Grod and approved of men. This verse is a con firmation of the preceding. These spiritual graces constitute the essential part of religion; for he that experiences and exer cises these virtues, is regarded by God as a true Christian, and must commend himself as such to the consciences of his fellowmen. Where these things;, therefore, are found, difference of opinion or practice in reference to unessential points, should not be allowed to disturb the harmony of Christian intercourse. It is to be observed, that the exercise of the virtues here spoken of, is represented by the apostle as a service rendered to Christ; "he that in these things serveth Christ," &c., which implies that Christ has authority over the heart and conscience. Instead of ev TO'JTOIZ, many of the oldest MSS. read sv TOUTW, referring to /rvs-W/r.': 'lie that in the Holy Spirit serveth Christ.' This reading is adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, and many others. The external authorities, however, in favour of the common text, are of much weight, and the context seems to demand it.

VERSE ID. Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things where1)!/ one may edify another. That is, let us earnestly endeavour to promote peace and mutual edification. The t/tiuf/s wliich make for peace, is equi valent to pcaee itself (r« TY^ tl<>r/yr^=z'.<>r/y^;} and things wherewith one may edify another, is mutual edification (r« r/Jc oixodo/jL7jZ=ocxodorfli>.') This verse is not an inference from the immediately preceding, as though the meaning were, 'Sincepeace is so acceptable to God, therefore let us cultivate it;' but rather from the whole passage: 'Since Christian love, the example of Christ, the comparative insignificance of the matters in dispute, the honour of the truth, the nature of real religion, all conspire to urge us to mutual forbearance, let us endeavour to promote peace and mutual edification.'

VERSE 20. For meat destroy not the work of God. Thia clause is, by De Brais and many other commentators, con sidered as a repetition of ver. 15. "Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died." The work of God then means a Christian brother; see Eph. ii. 10. Others refer the passage to the immediately preceding verses, in which the nature of true religion is exhibited. The work of God, in that case, is piety, and the exhortation is, 'Do not, for the sake of indul gence in certain kinds of food, injure the cause of true religion, i. e., pull not down what God is building up.' The figurative expression used by the apostle /JLTJ xa-rdX'js, pull not down, carries out the figure involved in the preceding verse. Be lievers arc to be edified, i. e., built up. They are the building of God, which is not to be dilapidated or injured by our want of love, or consideration for the weakness of our brethren.

All things (i. e., all kinds of food) are pure; lut it is evil (xaxov, not merely hurtful, but sin, evil in a moral sense) for that man that eateth with offence. This last clause admits of two interpretations. It may mean, It is sinful to eat in such a way as to cause others to offend. The sin intended is that of one strong in faith who so uses his liberty as to injure his weaker brethren. This is the view commonly taken of the passage, and it agrees with the general drift of the context, and especially with the following verse, where causing a brother to stumble is the sin agcinst which wre are cautioned. A com parison, however, of this verse with ver. 14, where much the same sentiment is expressed, leads many interpreters to a dif ferent view of the passage. In ver. 14 it is said, ' Nothing is common of itself, but to him that estecrneth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean;' and here, 'All things are pure, but it is evil to him who eateth with offence.' To eat with offence, and, to eat what we esteem impure, are synonymous expressions. If this is so, then the sin referred to is that which the weak commit, who act against their own conscience. But throughout the whole context, to offend, to cause to stumble, offence, are used, not of a man's causing himself to offend his own conscience, but of one man's so acting as to cause others to stumble. And as this idea is insisted upon in the following verse, Uic common interpretation is to be preferred.

VERSE 21. It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drinlc wine, ncr any thing iclicri-by tliy brother stumbh'th, or is offended, or is made weak. That is, abstaining from flesh, wine, or any thing else which is injurious to our brethren, is right, i. e., morally obligatory; (xatou, id quod rectum et probum est.) The words stumbletli, offended, made weak, do not, in this con nection, diil'er much from each other. Calvin supposes they differ in force, the- first being stronger than the second, and the second than the third. The sense then is, ' AVc should abstain from every thing whereby our brother is cast down, or even offended, or in the slightest degree injured.' This, however, is urging the terms beyond their natural import. It is very common with the- apostle to use several nearly synonymous words for the sake of expressing one idea strongly. The last two words (-/t ffxairda/.iZ£7(U "ft (i.cstl-^ii} are indeed omitted in some few manuscripts and versions, but in too few seriou>ly to impair their authority. Mill is almost the only editor of standing who rejects them.

There is an ellipsis in the middle clause of this verse which has been variously supplied. 'Xor to drink wine, nor to (drink) any tiling;' others, "nor to (do) any thing whereb'v, &c.' Ac cording to the first method of supplying the ellipsis, the mean ing is, • \Ve should not drink wine, nor any other intoxicating drink, when our doing so is injurious to others.' Hut the latter method is more natural and forcible, and includes the other, 4 We should do nothing which injures others.' The ground on which some of the earlv Christians thought it incumbent on them to abstain from wine, was not any general ascetic prin ciple, but because they feared they might be led to use wine which had been offered to the gods; to which they had the same objection as to meat which had been presented in sacrifice.

" Augustinus do moribus Manichaeorum, II. 14, Eo tenipore, ([iio haec scribebat apostolus, multa immoliticia caro in macello vendebatur. Et quia vino et'am libabatur Diis gentilium, multi fratres infirnii<>res. <|iii etiam rebus his venalibus utebantur, penitus a carnibus se et vino cohibere maluerunt, o.uam vel nescientes incidere in earn, quani putabaut, cum idolis communicationem." Wt'tstein.

VERSE 22. Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemncth not himself in that which he alloweth. Paul presents in this verse, more distinctly than he had before done, the idea that he required no concession of principle or renunciation of truth. He did not wish them to believe a thing to be sinful which was not sinful, or to trammel their own consciences with the scruples of their weaker brethren. He simply required them to use their liberty in a considerate and charitable manner. He, therefore, here says, "Hast thou faith? (i. e., a firm persuasion, e. g., of the lawful ness of al\ kinds of meat,) it is well, do not renounce it, but retain it, and use it piously, as in the sight of God.' Instead of reading the first clause interrogatively, Hast thou faith? it may be read, Thou hast faith. It is then presented in the form of an objection, which a Gentile convert might be disposed to make to the direction of the apostle to accommodate his conduct to the scruples of others. 4 Thou hast faith, thou mayest say; well, have it, I do not call upon thee to renounce it.' By faith here seems clearly to be understood the faith of which Paul had been speaking in the context; a faith which some Christians had, and others had not, viz., a firm belief "that there is nothing (no meat) unclean of itself." Have it to thyself, (xo.ro. csau-rov £££,) keep it to yourself. There are two ideas included in this phrase. The first is, keep it pri vately, i. e., do not parade it, or make it a point to show that you are above the weak scruples of your brethren; and the second is, that this faith or firm conviction is not to be renounced, but retained, for it is founded on the truth. Before Grod, i. e., in the sight of God. As God sees and recognises it, it need not be exhibited before men. It is to be cherished in our hearts, and used in a manner acceptable to God. Being right in itself, it is to be piously, and not ostentatiously or injuriously paraded and employed.

JBlessed is he that condemneth not himself in that which he alloweth. That is, blessed is the man that has a good con science; who does not allow himself to do what he secretly condemns. The faith, therefore, of which the apostle had spoken, is a great blessing. It is a source of great happiness to be sure that what we do is right, and, therefore, the firm conviction to which some Christians had attained, was not to be undervalued or renounced. Compare chap. i. 28, 1 Cor. xvi. 3, for a similar use of the word (oox:ttd~to) here employed. This interpretation seems better suited to the context, and to the force of the words, than another which is also frequently given, 'Blessed is the man who docs not condemn himself, i. e., give occasion to others to censure him for the use which he makes of his liberty.' This gives indeed a good sense, but it does not adhere so closely to the meaning of the text, nor does it so well agree with what follows.

VEKSK '2-\. But he that donlfeth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith; for whatsoever is not of fnith la.v/?i. That is, however sure a man may be that what he does is right, he cannot expect others to act on his faith. If a man thinks a thing to be wrong, to him it is wrong. lie, therefore, who is uncertain whether God has commanded him to abstain from certain meats, and who notwithstanding indulges in them, evi dently sins; he brings himself under condemnation. Because whatever is not of faith is sin; i. e., whatever we do which wo are not certain is right, to us is wrong. The sentiment of this verse, therefore, is nearly the same as of ver. 14. "To him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean." There is evidently a sinful disregard of the divine authority on the part of a man who does any thing which he supposes (Jod has forbidden, or which he is not certain he has allowed. The principle of morals contained in this verse is so obvious, that it occurs frequently in the writings of ancient philosophers. Cicero de Ofliciis, lib. 1, c. 0. Quodcirca bene praecipiunt, qui vetant quidquam agere, quod dubites. aequum sit, an iniquum. Aequitas eniin lucet ipsa per se: dubitatio cogitationem significat injuriae. This passage has an obvious bearing on the design of the apostle. He wished to convince the stronger Christians that it was unreasonable in them to expect their weaker brethren to act according to their faith; and that it was sinful in them so to use their liberty as to induce these scrupulous Christians to violate their own consciences.*

* The three verses which, in the common text, occur at the close of chapter yvi,, are found at the close of this chapter in the MSS. A, and in all those written in small letters on Wetstein's catalogue, from 1 to 55, except 13, 15,

1. The fellowship of the saints is not to be broken for unes sential matters; in other words, we have no right to make any thing a condition of Christian communion which is compatible with piety. Paul evidently argues on the principle that if a man is a true Christian, he should be recognised and treated as such. If God has received him, we should receive him,

2. The true criterion of a Christian character is found in the governing purpose of the life. lie that lives unto the Lord, i, e., he who makes the will of Christ the rule of his conduct, and the glory of Christ his constant object, is a true Christian, although from weakness or ignorance he may sometimes mistake the rule of duty, and consider certain things obligatory which Christ has never commanded, vs. 6 — 8.

10, 25, 27, 28, 50, 53, (two of these, 27, 53, do not contain this epistle, and 25, 28, are here defective.) To these are to be added many others examined by later editors, making one hundred and seven MSS. in which the passage occurs at tne close of this chapter. Of the versions, only the later Syriac, Sclavonic, ami Arab'c, assign it this position; with which, however, most of the Greek father? coincide. Beza, (in his 1st and 2d editions,) Grotius, Mill, Hammond, Wetstein, Griesbach, consider the passage to belong to this chapter.

On the other hand, the MSS. C. D. E., and several of the codd. minusc., the early Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopia, and Vulgate versions, and the Latin fathers, place the contested verses at the close of chapter xvi. This location is adopted in the Complutensian edition, by Erasmus, Stephens, Beza, (in his 3d, 4th, *nd 5th editions,) Bengel, Koppc, Knapp, Lachmann, and others.

These verses are left out in both places in the MSS F. G. 57, 07, 68, 69, 70. And are found in both places in A. 17, and in the Armenian version. The weight due to the early versions in deciding such a question, is obviously very great; and as these versions all coincide with the received text and some of the oldest MSS. in placing the passage at the close of the epistle, that is most probably its proper place. The doxology which those verses contain, so evi dently breaks the intimate connection between the close of the 14th chapter and the beginning of the 15th, that it is only by assuming with Sender that the epistle properly terminates here, or with Tholuck and others that Paul, after having closed with a doxology, begins anew on the same topic, that the presence of the passage in this place can be accounted for. But both these assumptions are unauthorized, and that of Semler destitute of the least plausi bility. — See Koppe's Excursus II. to this epistle.

according to whose will and for whose glory we arc to live, vs. 6 — 8. 2. Because he exercises an universal dominion over the liv:ng and the dead, vor. 9. 3. Because he is the final judge of all men, ver. 10. 4. Because passages of the Old Testament which are spoken of Jehovah, are by the apostle applied to Christ, ver. 11. o. Because, throughout this passage, Paul speaks of God and Christ indiscriminately, in a manner which shows that he regarded Christ as God. To live unto Christ is to live unto God; to stand before the judgment-seat of Christ is to give;in account unto God; to submit to Christ is to bow the knee to Jehovah.

4. The gospel does not make religion to consist in external observances. "Meat commendeth us not to God; for neither if we cat are we the better; neither if we eat not are we the worse." vs. 0. 7.

5. Though a thing may be lawful, it is not always expedient. The use of the liberty which every Christian enjovs under the gospel, is to be regulated by the law of love; hence it is often morally wrong to do what, in itself considered, may be innocent, vs. 15, 20, 21.

0. It is a great error in morals, and a great practical evil, to make that -infill which is in {'act innocent. Christian love never requires this or any other sacrifice of truth. Paul would not consent, for the sake of avoiding offence, that eating all kinds of food, even what had been ottered to idols, or disregarding sacred festivals of human appointment, should be made a sin; he strenuously and openly maintained the reverse. lie repre sents those who thought differently, as weak in faith, as bein"

under an error, from which more knowledge and more piety would free them. Concession to their weakness he enjoins on a principle perfectly consistent with the assertion of the truth, and with the preservation of Christian liberty, vs. lo — 2-3.

7. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin. It is wrong to do any thing which we think to be wrong. The converse of this pro position, however, is not true. It i> not always right to do what we think to be right. Paul, before his conversion, thought it right to persecute Christians; the Jews thought they did God service when they cast the disciples of the Saviour out of the synigogue. The cases, therefore, are not parallel. When we do what we think God has forbidden, we are evidently guilty of disobedience or contempt of the divine authority. But when we do what we think he has required, we may act under a cul pable mistake; or, although we may have the judgment that the act in itself is right, our motives for doing it may be very wicked. The state of mind under which Paul and other Jews persecuted the early Christians, was evil, though the persecu tion itself they regarded as a duty. It is impossible that a man should have right motives for doing a wrong action; for the very mistake as to what is right, vitiates the motives. The mistake implies a wrong state of mind; and, on the other hand, the misapprehension of truth produces a wrong state of mind. There may, therefore, be a very sinful zeal for God and reli gion (see Rom. x. 2;) and no man will be able to plead at the bar of judgment, his good intention as an excuse for evil con duct, ver. 23.

1. Christians should not allow any thing to alienate them from their brethren, who afford credible evidence that they are the servants of God. Owing to ignorance, early prejudice, weakness of faith, and other causes, there may and must exist a diversity of opinion and practice on minor points of duty. But this diversity is no sufficient reason for rejecting from Christian fellowship any member of the family of Christ. It is, however, one thing to recognise a man as a Christian, and another to recognise him as a suitable minister of a church, organized on a particular form of government and system of doctrines, vs. 1 — 12.

2. A denunciatory or censorious spirit is hostile to the spirit of the gospel. It is an encroachment on the prerogatives of the only Judge of the heart and conscience: it blinds the mind to moral distinctions, and prevents the discernment between mat ters unessential and those vitally important; and it leads us to forget our own accountableness, and to overlook our own faults, in our zeal to denounce those of others, vs. 4 — 10.

3. It is sinful to indulge contempt for those whom we suppose to be our inferiors, vs. 3, 10.

4. Christians should remember that, living or dying, they are the Lord's. This imposes the obligation to observe his will and to seek his glory; and it affords the assurance that the Lord will provide for all their wants. This peculiar propriety in his own people, Christ has obtained by his death and resur rection, vs. 8, 9.

5. We should stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, and not allow our consciences to be brought under the yoke of bondage to human opinions. There is a strong ten dency in men to treat, as matters of conscience, things which God has never enjoined. Wherever this disposition has been indulged or submitted to, it has resulted in bringing one class of men under the most degrading bondage to another; and in the still more serious evil of leading them to disregard the authority of God. Multitudes who would be shocked at the thought of eating meat on Friday, commit the greatest moral offences without the slightest compunction. It is, therefore, of great importance to keep the conscience free; under no subjec tion but to truth and God. This is necessary, not only on account of its influence on our own moral feelings, but also because nothing but truth can really do good. To advocate even a goo<\ cause with bad arguments does great harm, by exciting unnecessary opposition; by making good men, who oppose the arguments, appear to oppose the truth; by intro ducing a false standard of duty; by failing to enlist the support of an enlightened conscience, and by the necessary forfeiture of the confidence of the intelligent and well informed. The cause of benevolence, therefore, instead of being promoted, is injured by all exaggerations, erroneous statements, and false principles, on the part of its advocates, vs. 14, 122.

6. It is obviously incumbent on every man to endeavour to obtain and promote right views of duty, not only for his own sake, but for the sake of others. It is often necessary to assert our Christian liberty at the expense of incurring censure, and offending even good men, in order that right principles of duty may be preserved. Our Saviour consented to be regarded as a Sabbath-breaker, and even "a wine-bibber and friend of publi cans and sinners;" but wisdom was justified of her children. Christ did not in these cases see fit to accommodate his conduct to the rule of duty set up, and conscientiously regarded as cor rect by those around him. He saw that more good would arise from a practical disregard of the false opinions of the Jews, as to the manner in which the Sabbath was to be kept, and as to the degree of intercourse which was allowed with wicked men, than from concession to their prejudices. Enlightened benevo lence often requires a similar course of conduct, and a similar exercise of self-denial on the part of his disciples.

7. While Christian liberty is to be maintained, and right principles of duty inculcated, every concession consistent with truth and good morals should be made for the sake of peace and the welfare of others. It is important, however, that the duty of making such concessions should be placed on the right ground, and be urged in a right spirit, not as a thing to be demanded, but as that which the law of love requires. In this way success is more certain and more extensive, and the con comitant results are all good. It may at times be a difficult practical question, whether most good would result from com pliance with the prejudices of others, or from disregarding them. But where there is a sincere desire to do right, and a willingness to sacrifice our own inclinations for the good of others, connected with prayer for divine direction, there can be little danger of serious mistake. Evil is much more likely to arise from a disregard of the opinions and the welfare of our brethren, and from a reliance on our oAvn judgment, than from any course requiring self-denial, vs. 13, 15, 20, 21.