Romans 3 commentary

What dvnvghaae .tW-
eJw.eJv?-vOre vpetde
w .WhJog.wh
d.eJat
The first twenty verses of Chapter 3 divide into two rather simple parts: The first eight verses are an
imaginary dialogue that the apostle holds with the Jews. The second part, Verses 9.20, are his powerful
description of the condition of mankind before God. The first part, the dialogue with the Jews, grows out of
the close of Romans 2, in which the apostle answers the question that is still being hotly debated in the State
of Israel today: What constitutes a true Jew?
The State of Israel has never been able to settle that question. Is it religion? Is a Jew someone who believes the
Torah, the Law, and the Prophets? Is it someone who is culturally a Jew, who keeps a kosher kitchen and
observes all the dietary restrictions, who lives as a Jew and observes the traditions of Judaism? Many claim
Mf4MvMfcmvcmvMfiv4Imliu(vhMfiumvm415vU 35v13:v)4IvLe an atheist and ignore all the ritual and ceremony of
Judaism, but if you were born of Jewish ancestry you are a Jew." Still others think it is the facial features that
make a Jew .. the hooked nose, brown eyes, olive skin. But there are millions of Jews without these physical
characteristics. So the argument rages.
Paul answers that question in Chapter 2. He says a man is not a Jew who is one outwardly. In God's sight, a
Jew is one who has faith, who has the presence of the Spirit of God in his heart, who inwardly has faith in
Jesus the Messiah. That is what constitutes a Jew and nothing else; all these other distinctions are laid aside.
It is not the knowledge or possession of the Law that makes a man a Jew; it is not the rite of circumcision; it is
not the claim to a special relationship with God. The only thing that makes a man a Jew is faith in the
Messiah.
At this point the vivid imagination of Paul comes into play. He imagines a Jewish objector standing up and
arguing with him at this point. Perhaps this actually happened many times in the course of Paul's travels
throughout the Roman Empire. He had stated these things in many synagogues and surely at one time or
another some knowledgeable Jewish rabbi would stand up and argue with him. That is what he is sharing
with us now. In some ways this is a rather difficult passage
1 What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what
value is there in circumcision?
?tW ed5v,What advantage ... - The design of the first part of this chapter is to answer some
of the objections which might be offered by a Jew to the statements in the last chapter. The first
objection is stated in this verse. A Jew would naturally ask, if the view which the apostle had
given were correct, what special benefit could the Jew derive from his religion? The objection
would arise particularly from the position advanced
Rom_2:25-26, that if a pagan should do the
things required by the Law, he would be treated as “if” he had been circumcised. Hence, the
question, “what profit is there of circumcision?”

CLARKE, “Jew. What advantage then hath the Jew? Or what prof it is there of
circumcision? - As if he had said: You lately allowed, (Rom_2:25), that circumcision verily
profited; but if circumcision, or our being in covenant with God, raises us no higher in the
Divine favor than the Gentiles; if the virtuous among them are as acceptable as any of us; nay,
and condemn our nation too, as no longer deserving the Divine regards; pray tell me, wherein
lies the superior honor of the Jew; and what benefit can arise to him from his circumcision, and
being vested in the privileges of God’s peculiar people?
GILL, “What advantage then hath the Jew?.... If he is not properly a Jew, who is born of
Jewish parents, and brought up in the customs, rites, and religion of the Jewish nation, but
anyone of whatsoever nation, that is born again of water, and of the Spirit; where is the superior
excellency of the Jew to the Gentile? A man may as well be born and brought up a Heathen as a
Jew; the one has no more advantages than the other by his birth and education: it may be
rendered, "what hath the Jew more?" or "what has he superfluous" or "abundant?" the phrase
answers to the Hebrew
What WisebnWfo crWEcc_1:3,WdCcmCWcjWwgrJgwgJ,W.dCOAWpwvMcAWCOACWOWFOrE.WOrJWcrW
Ecc_6:8,WWhG: WebsnWfo,W.dCOAWCOACWOWdcjgWFOrWFvwg.,WHmTWOrJWcrWRom_3:11,What WebnWfo,W.dCOAWcjWOWFOrW
IgAAgwE.WACgWMcwjAWvMWACgjgWpOjjO(gjWACgW)gpAΤO(crAWwgrJgwWIίWοὗνWzVπὗρρVὗε, "what abundance?" and the
last by τι περισσον, "what more", or "superfluous", or "abundant?" the phrase used by the apostle
here:
or what profit is there of circumcision? since that which is outward in the flesh profits not
unless the law is kept, otherwise circumcision is no circumcision; and if an uncircumcised
Gentile keeps the law, he is a better man than a circumcised Jew; yea, he judges and condemns
him; for the only true circumcision is internal, spiritual, and in the heart. To this the apostle
answers in the Rom_3:2.
Htarih IsαRom_3:1-8. Jewish objections answered.
What advantage then hath the Jew? — that is, “If the final judgment will turn solely on
the state of the heart, and this may be as good in the Gentile without, as in the Jew within, the
sacred enclosure of God’s covenant, what better are we Jews for all our advantages?”
Answer:
bt?(r Isα1.Though Paul has clearly proved that bare circumcision brought nothing to the Jews, yet since
he could not deny but that there was some difference between the Gentiles and the Jews, which by that
symbol was sealed to them by the Lord, and since it was inconsistent to make a distinction, of which God
was the author, void and of no moment, it remained for him to remove also this objection. It was indeed
evident, that it was a foolish glorying in which the Jews on this ACCOUNT
indulged; yet still a doubt
remained as to the design of circumcision; for the Lord would not have appointed it had not some benefit
been intended. He therefore, by way of an objection, asks, what it was that made the Jew superior to the
Gentile; and he subjoins a reason for this by another question, What is the benefit of circumcision? For this
separated the Jews from the common class of men; it was a partition*wall, as Paul calls ceremonies, which

kept parties asunder.
PULPIT, “What advantage then hath the Jew! or what is the profit of circumcision!
Much ( πολὺ , a neuter adjective, AGREEING with τὸ περισσὸν ) every way (not by all means; the
meaning is that in all respects the POSITION of the Jew is an advantageous one): first (rather
than chiefly, as in the Authorized Version. One point of advantage is specified, which might have been
followed by a secondly and a thirdly, etc. But the writer stops here, the mention of this first being sufficient for
his purpose. Others are enumerated, so as to elucidate the purport of κατὰ πάντα τρύπον ,
inRom_9:4, Rom_9:5) for that they (the Jews) were entrusted with the oracles of God. The
word λόγια
(always used in the plural in the New Testament) occurs also in Act_7:38; Heb_5:12;1Pe_4:11.
Of these passages the most apposite is Act_7:38, where the Divine communications to Moses on Mount
Sinai are spoken of as λόγια ζῶντα
(cf. Num_24:4, Num_24:16, where Balaam speaks of himself as ἀκούων
λόγια Θεοῦ
). Some (as Meyer), in view of the supposed, reference in the following verse to the Jews
rejection of the gospel, take the word λόγια
here to mean especially the revealed promises of the Redeemer.
But neither the word itself nor its use elsewhere suggests any such limited meaning; nor does the context
really require it. It may denote generally the Divine revelations of the Old Testament, which, for the eventual
benefit of mankind, had been entrusted exclusively to the Jews.

PULPIT, “
Rom_3:1*8
(2) Certain objections with regard to the Jews suggested and met. In
this passage, before proceeding with
his argument, the apostle meets certain objections that might be made to what has been so far said. Some
difficulty in determining his exact meaning arises from the concise and pregnant form in which the objections
are put and answered, and from fresh ones arising out of the answers, which have also to be met. The
objections are from the Jewish standpoint, though not put into the mouth of an objecting Jew, but rather
suggested as likely ones by St. Paul himself. To the original readers of the Epistle, who were familiar with
the tone of Jewish thought, the sequence of the ideas would probably be more obvious than to us.
Reserving special consideration of successive clauses for our exposition of each verse, we may, in the first
place, exhibit thus the GENERAL
drift.
Objection 1 (Rom_3:1). If being a Jew, if circumcision itself, gives one no advantage over the Gentile, what
was the use of the old covenant at all? It is thus shown to have been illusory; and God's own truth and
faithfulness are impugned, if he is supposed to have given, as conveying advantages, what really conveyed
none. (This last thought, though not expressed, must be supposed to be implied in the objection, since it is
replied to in the answer.)
Answer (Rom_3:2*4).
(1)
It was not illusory; it did convey great advantages in the way of privilege and opportunity; this advantage
first, not to mention other. that "the oracles of God" were entrusted to the Jew. And
(2)
if some (more or fewer, it matters not) have failed to realize these advantages, it has been their fault, not
God's. It is man's unfaithfulness, not his, that has been the cause of the failure. Nay, though, ACCORDING
to the hasty saying of the psalmist, all men were false, God's truth remains; nay, further, as is expressed
in another psalm (Psa_51:1*19.), man's very unfaithfulness is found to commend his faithfulness the more,
and redound to his greater glory.
Objection 2 (Rom_3:5). Based on the last assertion. But if man's unfaithfulness has this result, how can
God, consistently with his justice, be wrath with us and punish us for it? Surely the Jew (whose case we are
now considering) may claim exemption from "the wrath" of God spoken of above, his unfaithfulness being
allowed to have served only to establish God's truth and to enhance his glory.

Answer (Rom_3:6*8). I have suggested this objection as though the matter could be regarded from a mere
human point of view, as though it were one between man and man; for it is true that a man cannot justly take
vengeance on another who has not really harmed him. But such a view is inapplicable to God in his dealings
with man; it does not touch our doctrine of his righteous wrath against sin as such. I can only meet it with
a \ὴ γένοιτο
. For
(1)
it would preclude God from judging the world at all, as we all believe he will do. Any heathen sinner might
put in the same plea, saying, Why am I too (
κἀγὼ ) judged as a sinner? Nay,
(2)
since it involves the principle of sin being evil, not in itself, but only with regard to its consequences, it
would, if carried out, justify the odious view (which we Christians are by some falsely accused of holding)
that we may do evil that good may come.
gktWsedvdoaeh 9v4 CHRISTIANS’ ADVANTAGES ABOVE HEATHENS
Rom_3:1*2. What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way.
IT is not easy to form a just estimate of the privileges ATTACHED
to the profession of Christianity: we are
ready either, on the one hand, to rate them too high, or, on the other, to undervalue and despise them. The
Jews laid so great a stress on their relation to Abraham, that they could scarcely conceive it possible for
them to perish: they concluded, that because they bore in their flesh the external seal of God’s covenant,
they must of necessity be partakers of its spiritual blessings: and when St. Paul shewed them their error,
they indignantly replied, “What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?” Thus
many amongst ourselves are apt to imagine, that their having been admitted by baptism into the Christian
covenant will secure them an admission into heaven: and, when they are warned against this sad delusion,
they are ready to say, that the heathen are in a happier state than they. In opposition to this, we propose to
shew,
I. What advantages we, as Christians, have above the heathen—
The Apostle intimates, that the Jews, merely as Jews, possessed “every way much” advantage above the
heathen: but, instead of descending to particulars, he contents himself with specifying one, which, as it was
the greatest, so in fact it included all the rest, namely, that “to them were committed the Oracles of God.”
What he has stated thus comprehensively, we shall enter into more minutely.
We say then, that as Christians, we have many things to which the heathen are utter stangers: we have,
1. A guide for our faith—
[The oracles which the heathen consulted, were altogether unworthy of CREDIT. Their answers were
purposely given with such ambiguity, that they might appear to correspond with the event, whatever the

event might be [Note: A famous instance of this is mentioned by Herodotus, B. i.—Cyrop æ dia, B. vii.
Cr
œ sus, king of Lydia, inquired of his gods, Whether he should make war against Cyrus? The Oracles
answered, That he was then only to think himself in danger, when a mule should reign over the Medes; and
that, on his passing over the river Halys, he should destroy a powerful kingdom. Relying on these answers
as predicting success, he commenced the war, which speedily terminated in the ruin of himself and his
whole kingdom: and when he complained that he had been deceived by the Oracles, he was told, That
Cyrus was that mule (being a Persian by his father’s side, and a Mede by his mother’s); and that the
kingdom which he was to destroy, was his own. See the ACCOUNT
given in Prideaux’s Connection of the
Old and New Testament History.]. But our oracles have no such subterfuges: nor can we possibly err in
giving to them the most implicit confidence. They declare to us the nature and perfections of God—the way
which he has appointed for our reconciliation with him—the eternal state of those who shall embrace his
proffered mercy, and of those who shall reject it. Of these things the heathen were wholly ignorant; nor could
their oracles afford them any instruction on which they could rely.
What an amazing advantage then has the meanest Christian above the greatest of the heathen
philosophers! The little volume which he has in his hand, sets before him innumerable truths, which reason
never could explore; it reveals them to him so plainly, that he who runs may read and understand them: and,
instead of deceiving him to his ruin, it will “make him wise unto everlasting salvation.”]
2. A warrant for his hope—
[The oracles which could declare nothing with certainty, could afford to their votaries no solid ground of
hope. But the Christian who believes the oracles of God, has an “anchor for his soul so sure and steadfast,”
that not all the storms or tempests which either men or devils can raise, shall ever drive him from the station
where he is moored. Suppose his discouragements to be as great as the most gloomy imagination can paint
them; he has reasons in plenty to assign for his hope. The sovereignty of God—the sufficiency of Christ—
the freeness and extent of the promises—the immutability of Jehovah, who has CONFIRMED his
promises with an oath—these, and many other things which are revealed in the sacred volume, may enable
the person who relies upon them to go to the very throne of God himself, and to plead for acceptance with
him: and, in proportion as he relies upon them, he has within his own bosom a pledge, that he shall never be
ashamed.
What an advantage is this to the man that is hoping for eternal happiness! Surely “blessed are the eyes
which see the things that we see, and hear the things which we hear.”]
3. A rule for his conduct—
[The wise men of antiquity could not so much as devise what constituted the chief good of man; much less
could they invent rules which should be UNIVERSALLY APPLICABLE for the direction of their followers:

and the rules which they did prescribe, were in many respects subversive both of individual and public
happiness. But the oracles of God are proper to direct us in every particular. We may indeed in some more
intricate cases err in the application of them, (else we should be infallible; which is not the lot of man upon
earth;) but in all important points the path we are to follow is made as clear to us as the racer’s course: yea,
the word is not only a general “light to our feet, but a lantern to our steps:” so that what was obscure at a
distance, is discovered to us on our nearer approach, and a direction is given us, “This is the way; walk ye in
it.” The whole circle of moral and religious duty is thus accurately drawn. The poor man who is conversant
with his Bible, needs not to go to the philosopher, and consult with him; nor need he regard the maxims
current in the world. With the Scriptures as his guide, and the Holy Spirit as his instructor, he needs no
casuist, but an upright heart; no director, but a mind bent upon doing the will of God. If he derive assistance
from any, it is from those only who are more fraught with divine knowledge, and whose superior illumination
has qualified them to instruct others. But they
are no farther to be regarded, than as they
speak ACCORDING
to the written word.
Compare now the illiterate Christian with the most learned pagan, and see how greatly he is benefited in this
respect also by the light of revelation. If indeed he rest in his admission into the Christian covenant, and look
no further than to a mere profession of Christianity, he may easily overrate his privileges: but if he consider
them means to an end, and improve them in that view, he can never be sufficiently thankful, that he was
early received into the bosom of the Church, and initiated by baptism into a profession of Christ’s religion.]
Having stated our advantages, we proceed to notice,
II. The improvement we should make of them—
If the possession of the sacred oracles constitute our chief advantage, doubtless we should,
1. Study them—
[“Search the Scriptures,” says our Lord, “for in them ye think ye have eternal life.” If we neglect the word of
God, we lose the very advantage which God in his mercy has vouchsafed to give us, and reduce ourselves,
as much as lieth in us, to the state of heathens. If then we shudder at the thought of reverting to heathenism,
let us, not on some occasions only, like the heathen, but on all occasions, consult the oracles, whereby we
profess to be directed. “Let our meditation be in them day and night;” and let them be “our delight and our
counsellors [Note: See Deu_6:6*9and Psa_1:2
and Pro_2:1*6.]” — — —]
2. Conform ourselves to them—
[The end of studying the sacred oracles is not to obtain a speculative knowledge, but to have our whole
souls cast, as it were, into the mould which is formed therein. By them we must regulate both our principles

and our practice. We must not presume to dispute against them, because they are not agreeable to our pre*
conceived opinions; we must not complain that this is too humiliating, and that is too strict; but must receive
with submission all which the Scriptures reveal, believing implicitly whatever they declare, and executing
unreservedly whatever they enjoin — — — If we do not thus obey the truth, we shall indeed be in a worse
state than the heathens; our baptism will be no baptism; and the unbaptized pagans, who walk according to
the light they have, will rise up in judgment against us for abusing the privileges which they perhaps would
have improved with joy and gratitude [Note: Rom_2:25*27.].]
3. Promote the knowledge of them in the world—
[If God had imparted to us a secret whereby we could heal all manner of diseases; and our own interest, as
well as that of others, would he greatly promoted by disclosing it to the whole world; should we not gladly
made it known? Shall we then withhold from the Gentile world the advantages we enjoy; more especially
when God has commanded us to communicate as freely as we have received? Should we not contribute, by
pecuniary aid, or by our prayers at least, to send the Gospel to the heathen, that they may be partakers with
us in all the blessings of salvation?
But there are, alas! heathens, baptized heathens, at home also; and to those we should labour to make
known the Gospel of Christ. We should bring them under the sound of the Gospel—we should disperse
among them books suited to their states and capacities—we should provide instruction for the rising
generation—we should especially teach our own children and servants—and labour, “by turning men from
darkness unto light, to turn them also from the power of Satan unto God.”]
BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR 1.3, “What advantage then hath the Jew? …chiefly, because
that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Moral advantage
I. There is much advantage to those favoured with clearer light and higher privilege, in every
respect. They have the advantage—
1. Of feeling that God cares for them. The heathen had, some of them, lost the knowledge of
God altogether, and others were only dimly conscious of His goodness.
2. Of a superior temporal condition. They are delivered from the miseries inflicted by cruel
superstitions, are able to cheek the progress of debasing immoralities, and to promote
freedom, comfort, peace, and brotherhood.
3. Of better opportunity of performing what their better position demands. The man who
possessed five talents had the advantage over his fellow. He had a better command of the
market, and could stand a greater shock of adverse circumstances. They would help each
other to grow; for five united are more than five times as strong as one, and more than two-
and-a-half times as strong as two. An Israelite or a Christian may walk uprightly in his
noonday light more easily than a heathen may walk at all in his dim twilight.

4. Of attaining, if faithful, an absolutely higher reward. As two statesmen of equal desert,
and equally in favour, take higher and lower positions on account of their different
capacities, so those who receive equally the King’s commendation, “Well done, good and
faithful servant,” shall yet differ, as one star differeth from another, in glory.
II. The greatest advantage is to have the oracles of God.
1. The knowledge they impart is a blessing. As day is more blessed than night; as freedom for
thought is better than the fetters of ignorance, so the possession of these oracles is
unspeakably better than deprivation of them.
2. It is a blessing to have assured Divine communication. As the spirit of a plebeian is lifted
by a word or a look from his king; as the heart of an absent child is gladdened by the outside
of his father’s letter, so is man blessed by the fact that God has spoken to him.
3. It is an advantage to be thus taken into peculiar covenant relationship to God. Every
precept of these oracles is a condition of some blessedness which God pledges Himself to
bestow; and every promise contains God’s oath of faithfulness to all to whom these oracles
come. It is a high advantage to know that we are God’s and God is ours, as we grasp in faith
and obedience His sacred Word. Over our higher privileges it becomes us to “rejoice with
trembling.” With all thy responsibilities, thy greater required service, and thy heavier doom
if faithless, still “Happy art thou, O Israel,” “satisfied with favour, and full with the blessing
of the Lord.” (W. Griffiths.)
Moral advantage
1. Man has unspeakable advantage in the possession of the oracles of God.
2. May lose it through unbelief.
3. Cannot thereby invalidate God’s faithfulness.
4. Must ultimately confess and justify it. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
The surplus of privilege
The following supposed cases may serve to explain the force of the question raised, and replied
to in the text: If the scholarships at Oxford or Cambridge are given away irrespective of the
seminaries from which the candidates come, what relative advantage has a youth educated at
one of our public schools over and above another who is sell-taught, and with few helps? Much
every way; for he has had the best text books, skilled masters, and the like. Or, again, suppose a
philanthropist should undertake the reformation of the waifs and strays of society in his own
neighbourhood, and for this purpose were to select certain youths whom he received into an
institution where they were fed, clothed, and specially trained. Now if, after a while, the person
in question should throw open the doors of this establishment, would not there still be a surplus
of privilege belonging to those whom he had first admitted?—would not the care and instruction
which they had already enjoyed raise them above their fellows, and fit them for being the most
qualified instruments in the carrying out of their benefactors’ liberal-minded and large-hearted
designs? (C. Nell, M. A.)
The advantages of Christians over heathens

I. What they are.
1. A guide for faith.
2. A warrant for hope.
3. A rule for conduct.
II. The improvement we should make of them.
1. Study.
2. Obey.
3. Diffuse. (C. Simeon, M. A.)
The advantage of possessing the Holy Scriptures
I. The appellation here given to the Holy Scriptures—the oracles of God.
1. There seems to be an allusion to the heathen oracles. These were, indeed, merely
pretended communications from gods that had no existence; or, perhaps, in some instances
real communications from demons, and the answers which were given were generally
expressed in such unintelligible, or equivocal phrases as might easily be wrested to prove the
truth of the oracles whatever the truth might be (Act_16:16).
2. But the apostles, when they term the Scriptures “oracles” (Act_7:38; Heb_5:12;
1Pe_4:11), signify that they are real revelations from the true God. These were
communicated—viva voce, as when God spake to Moses face to face—in visions, as when a
prophet in an ecstacy had supernatural revelations (Gen_15:1; Gen 46:2; Eze_11:24;
Dan_8:2)—in dreams, as those of Jacob (Gen_28:12) and Joseph (Gen_37:5-6)—by Urim
and Thummim, which was a way of knowing the will of God by the ephod or breastplate of
the high priest. After the building of the temple, God’s will was generally made known by
prophets Divinely inspired, and who were made acquainted with it in different ways
(1Ch_9:20-21).
3. The apostles, giving the Scriptures this appellation, show that they considered them as
containing God’s mind and will (2Ti_3:16; 1Pe_1:10-13; 1Pe 1:23; 1Pe 1:25; 2Pe_1:19-21).
And these apostles, being themselves inspired (Joh_14:17; Joh_14:26; Joh_15:26;
Joh_16:13) could not be mistaken. Christ Himself has borne a clear testimony to the truth
and importance of the Scriptures of the Old Testament (Joh_5:39; Joh 10:35; Luk_16:29;
Luk 16:31).
4. Other proofs of their inspiration are—the majesty of their style; the evident truth and
authority of their doctrines; the harmony of all their parts; their power on the minds of
myriads; the accomplishment of their prophecies; the miracles performed by their authors.
If these things can be affirmed of the writing of the Old Testament, how much more of the
New, which consist of the discourses of God’s Incarnate Truth (Heb_1:1), and of His Divinely
commissioned servants (Eph_4:7-13).
II. The advantages those have above others, who are favoured with them.
1. There are many truths of vast importance which may be known from God’s works
(Rom_1:19-20); nevertheless, matter of fact has proved that even as to the most obvious and
primary truths, all flesh have corrupted their way. If the existence of a Deity has been
generally acknowledged, yet His unity and spirituality has not, but the most civilised nations
have multiplied their gods without end (Rom_1:21-24; hence Isa_40:19-20; Isa_41:6-7;

Isa_44:12-20). As to the accountableness of man, fatalism on the one hand, and self-
sufficiency on the other, prevailed even among the Greeks and Romans; as to the distinction
between vice and virtue, we refer to the apostle (Rom_1:26-32). And as to a future state of
happiness or misery, they were in general “without hope.”
2. But if these and such like truths could have been discovered by the light of nature, they
are taught in Scripture much more clearly and fully; with more authority and certainty; and
in a way more adapted to the condition of mankind, who in general have neither capacity nor
time for deep and difficult research. Many other truths of equal importance, which are not
known at all by the light of nature, are clearly revealed in the Scriptures.
3. The oracles of God may well be called by St. Stephen “lively.” God’s word is a “hammer
and fire,” “quick and powerful” (Heb_4:12), “spirit and life” (Joh_6:63). They partake of the
spiritual, living, and powerful nature of Him, from whom they proceed. The God who gave
them is still at hand to give the right understanding and feeling of them (Luk_24:45;
2Pe_1:20), and still works by and with them. Hence men, from age to age, have been
“pricked,” “cut to the heart” (Act_2:37; Act 5:33), “begotten” (Jas_1:18), “born again”
(1Pe_1:23), “set free” (Joh_8:32), “made clean” (Joh_15:3), “sanctified” (Joh_17:17;
Eph_5:26), built up and made perfect by them (Eph_4:12; 2Ti_3:15).
4. But here arises a grand objection; the Jews, though favoured with the oracles of God, were
as wicked as the Gentiles (chap. 2); professing Christians are as wicked as the heathen. This
is by no means the case. A very favourable change in the manners of men in general has been
wrought where the Scriptures have been received; and myriads, both Jews and Christians,
have thereby been made truly pious persons in all ages; and with respect to the rest, “if some
did not believe, shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?” (verse 3).
III. Our obligation to improve this advantage for ourselves and to communicate it to others.
1. The oracles of God can only profit those who believe them (Heb_3:11; Heb 4:2). They
must also be considered and laid to heart, otherwise they cannot profit an intelligent and
free being, for they do not work upon our minds mechanically. We must bring to their
consideration a teachable and serious mind; must receive them with reverence, gratitude,
and affection; practise the religion they describe; and, in order to all this, pray to Him that
gave them, that He may impart to us the Spirit by whose influences alone we can either
understand or comply with them.
2. With respect to others—the oracles of God are equally necessary and designed for all men
(Psa_22:27; Isa_2:2; Mic_4:1; Isa_11:9; Isa 60:8; Isa 06:9; Luk_24:47; Mar_16:15;
Rom_1:5; Rev_14:6-7). All professing Christians are under an obligation to aid their
circulation, that their endeavours may be consistent with their prayers, for they pray that His
“kingdom may come.” (Joseph Benson.)
The advantages and disadvantages of having the Divine oracles compared: a plea
for missions
I. To whom much is given much will be required; the question, then, is whether it is better, that
it shall be given or withheld.
1. The Jew, who sinned against the light of his revelation, will have a severer retribution
than the Gentile who only sinned against the light of his own conscience; and the nations of
Christendom who have rejected the gospel will incur a darker doom than the native of China,
whose remoteness, while it shelters him from the light of the New Testament in this world,
shelters him from the pain of its fulfilled denunciations in another. And with these

considerations a shade of uncertainty appears to pass over the question—whether the
Christianisation of a people ought at all to be meddled with.
2. But without an authoritative solution of this question from God, we are really not in
circumstances to determine it. We have not all the materials of the question before us. We
know not how to state what the addition is which knowledge confers upon the sufferings of
disobedience; or how far an accepted gospel exalts the condition of him who was before a
stranger to it. It is all a matter of revelation on which side the difference lies; and he who is
satisfied to be wise up to that which is written will quietly repose upon the deliverance of
Scripture on this subject. “Go and preach the gospel to every creature under heaven,” and
“go unto all the world, and teach all nations.” These parting words of our Saviour may not be
enough to quell the anxieties of the speculative Christian, but they are quite enough to
decide the conduct of the practical Christian.
3. But the verses before us advance one step farther, and enter on the question of profit and
loss attendant on the possession of the oracles of God; and to decide, on the part of the
former, that the advantage was much every way. And it is not for those individuals alone
who reaped the benefit that the apostle makes the calculation. He makes an abatement for
the unbelief of all the others; and, balancing the difference, he lands us in a computation of
clear gain to the whole people. And it bears importantly on this question; for surely we may
well venture to circulate these oracles when told of the most stiff-necked and rebellious
people on earth, that, with all their abuse of them, they conferred a positive advantage on
their nation. And yet what a fearful deduction from this advantage must have been made by
their wickedness. It were hard to tell the amount of aggravation upon all their sin, in that it
was sin against the light of the oracles of God; but the apostle tells us that, let the amount be
what it may, it was more than countervailed by the positive good done through these oracles.
II. A few remarks both on the speculative and on the practical part of this question.
1. The Bible, when brought into a new country, may be instrumental in saving those who
submit to its doctrine; and, in so doing, it saves them from an absolute condition of misery
in which they were previously involved. If along with this advantage to those who receive it,
it aggravates the condition of those who reject it, it does not change into wretchedness that
which before was enjoyment; and the whole amount of the evil that has been rendered is
only to be computed by the difference in degree between the suffering that is laid upon sin
with, and sin without the knowledge of the Saviour. We do not know how great the
difference is, but we gather that it was better for the Jews, in spite of all the deeper
responsibility and guilt which their possession of the Old Testament laid upon the
disobedient, yet that a net accession of gain was thus rendered to the whole—then may we
infer that any enterprise by which the Bible is more extensively circulated, or taught, is of
positive benefit to every neighbourhood.
2. Though in Jewish history they were the few to whom the oracles of God were a blessing,
and the many to whom they were an additional condemnation—yet, on the whole, the good
so predominated over the evil, that it on the whole was for the better and not for the worse
that they possessed these oracles. But the argument gathers in strength as we look onward to
futurity, as we dwell upon the fact of the universal prevalence of the gospel of Christ. Even in
this day of small things, the direct blessing which follows in the train of a circulated Bible
and a proclaimed gospel overbalances the incidental evil; and when we think of the latter-
day glory which it ushers in, who should shrink from the work of hastening it forward,
because of a spectre conjured up from the abyss of human ignorance? Even did the evil now
predominate over the good, still is a missionary enterprise like a magnanimous daring for a
great moral and spiritual achievement, which will at length reward the perseverance of its
devoted labourers. There are collateral evils attendant on the progress of Christianity. At one

time it brings a sword instead of peace, and at another it stirs up a variance in families, and
at all times does it deepen the guilt of those who resist the overtures which it makes to them.
But these are only the perils of a voyage that is richly laden with the moral wealth of many
future generations. These are but the hazards of a battle which terminates in the proudest
and most productive of all victories—and, if the liberty of a great empire be an adequate
return for the loss of the lives of its defenders, then is the glorious liberty of the children of
God, which will at length be extended over the face of a still enslaved and alienated world,
more than an adequate return for the spiritual loss that is sustained by those who, instead of
fighting for the cause, have resisted and reviled it.
III. Conclude with a few practical remarks.
1. It is with argument such as this that we would meet the anti-missionary spirit, Not long
ago Christianising enterprise was traduced as a kind of invasion on the safety and innocence
of paganism, and it was affirmed that, though idolatry is blind, yet it were better not to
awaken its worshippers, than to drag them forth by instruction to the hazards and the
exposures of a more fearful responsibility. But why should we be restrained now from the
work by a calculation, which did not restrain the missionaries of two thousand years ago?
2. If man is to be kept in ignorance because every addition of light brings along with it an
addition of responsibility—then ought the species to be arrested at home as well as abroad in
its progress towards a more exalted state of humanity; and such evils as may attend the
transition to moral and religious knowledge, should deter us from every attempt to rescue
our own countrymen from any given amount of darkness by which they may now be
encompassed.
3. However safe it is to commit the oracles of God into the hands of others, yet, considering
ourselves in the light of those to whom these oracles are committed, it is a matter of urgent
concern whether, to us personally, the gain or the loss will predominate. It resolves itself,
with every separate individual, into the question of his secured heaven, or his more
aggravated hell—whether he be of the some who turn the message of God into an instrument
of conversion; or of the many who, by neglect and unconcern, render it the instrument of
their sorer condemnation. (T. Chalmers, D. D.)
The oracles of God
I. Their leading characters.
1. Absolute truth and wisdom. The word “oracles” signifies a “Divine speech or answer.”
Words professing to be from God ought to have strong evidence; and how mighty and
commanding is the evidence—attested by miracle, ratified by the fulfilment of prophecy,
continuing when they have for ages reproved the world, giving life and salvation to this hour.
If, then, they are from God, the question of their wisdom and truth is settled. And here is the
advantage of possessing these oracles. There is not a question relating either to duty or
salvation to which there is not here an answer. Are you an inquirer? There is the oracle.
Consult it; for “it shall speak, and shall not lie.”
2. Infinite importance. On those questions which are merely curious the oracle is silent, but
on no subject which it behoves us to know, e.g., the character of God; the laws by which we
are governed; the true state of man; rescue and redemption; the practical application and
attainment of this mercy.
3. Life. Hence they are called “lively” or living oracles, or as our Lord says, “The words that I
speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” No other book has this peculiarity. Show

me one which all the wicked fear; which cuts deep into the conscience, and rouses salutary
fears; which comforts and supports; and whilst its blessed truths quiver on the lips of the
dying, disarms death of its sting. Show me a man who, when he discourses, awakens souls
from deadly sleep; who to a trembling spirit says, “Believe, and live,” and he actually believes
and lives; whose counsel effectually guides, quickens, and comforts; and you show me one
who speaks only as the oracles of God. Among all who have been celebrated for oratory, who
ever professed to produce effects like these? Nothing explains this but the life which the
Spirit imparts. With the oracles of God the Author is present. You cannot avoid this power. It
will make the Word either “a savour of life unto life, or a savour of death unto death.”
4. They make all other oracles vocal.
(1) Nature has its solemn voice, but it is not heard where the gospel is not. In
heathendom the very heavens are turned into idols, and God is excluded from the
thoughts of men. But whenever the living oracles come, then every star, and mountain,
and river, proclaims its glorious Maker: “day unto day uttereth speech.”
(2) The general providence of God in the government of nations is intended to display
the wisdom, power, goodness, justice, and truth of God; and terminate in the conversion
of all nations to the faith of Christ. Yet all this is unknown to those who are destitute of
the Divine oracles. To them it appears that one event happens to all. Every occurrence is
either attributed to chance, to blind fate, or to the caprice of deities without Wisdom, and
without mercy. The living oracle gives a voice to all this. Instructed by it we mark the
design of God, “who worketh all in all.” We see all things tending to one end, “the glory of
the Lord shall be revealed; and all flesh shall see it together.”
(3) There is also a particular providence which appoints us our station in life, our
blessings and our sorrows. Many lessons this providence is intended to teach us. “The
goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance.” But till the living oracle speaks, all is
silence; and we derive no lessons of true wisdom from the events of life. When we
acquaint ourselves with God in His Word, then everything ministers to our “instruction
in righteousness.”
5. Variety. Here we have history, proverbs, poetry, examples, doctrine, prophecy, parable,
allegory, and metaphor.
6. Fulness of truth. Great as are the revelations, nothing is exhausted. As in Christ the
fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily, to be eternally manifested; so in His Word there is a
fulness of truth. And hence the Bible is always new.
(1) In regard to morals, we have principles, as well as acts, applicable forever.
(2) Who can exhaust the doctrine of Holy Scripture? Doctrines especially relating to
God, and Christ, and the depth of all-redeeming love.
(3) The effects of the whole scheme will be developing forever. In a very important sense
the Bible will be the oracles of God to the Church above.
II. These oracles are “committed” or entrusted To You.
1. To be read and understood, consequently there is great guilt in treating them with
indifference and neglect.
2. To interpret honestly. They are “the oracles of God”; and it is a sin of no ordinary
magnitude to pervert their meaning.
3. To make them known to others. It is a great sin to restrain the Scriptures.
III. Their advantage.

1. Instruction.
2. Direction.
3. Salvation. (Richard Watson.)
The oracles of God
I. The oracles of God.
1. The meaning of the term.
(1) Among heathen the word was first used to denote the answers supposed to be given
by their gods, and was afterwards applied to the shrines where such answers were given.
Whether these answers were forged by the priests, or were the results of diabolical
agency, it is not necessary to inquire. Suffice it that though proverbially obscure, they are
regarded with veneration and confidence. No enterprise of importance was undertaken
without consulting them; splendid embassies, with magnificent presents, were sent from
far distant states, with a view to obtain a propitious answer; and contending nations
often submitted to them the decision of their respective claims. With these facts the
Gentile converts were acquainted; in these opinions they had participated. The word,
therefore, could scarcely fail to excite in them some of the ideas and emotions with which
it had been so long and intimately associated. No title, then, could be better adapted to
inspire them with veneration for the Scriptures.
(2) Nor would it appear less sacred, or important to the Jew, associated as it was with
the Urim and Thummim, and with those responses which Jehovah gave from the inner
sanctuary. In our version this place is frequently styled The Oracle; and the answers
which God there gave to the inquiries of His worshippers were full, explicit, and definite;
forming a perfect contrast to the oracles of paganism. By employing this language, he did
in effect say to the Gentile converts, All that you once supposed the oracles of your
countrymen to be, the Scriptures really are. With at least equal force did his language say
to the Jews, The Scriptures are no less the Word of God than were the answers which He
formerly gave to your fathers from the mercy seat.
2. This title is given to the Scriptures with perfect truth and propriety. They do not, indeed,
resemble in all respects the heathen oracles. They were never designed to gratify a vain
curiosity; much less to subserve the purposes of ambition or avarice, and this is, probably,
one reason why many persons never consult them. But whatever a man’s situation may be,
this oracle, if consulted in the manner in which God has prescribed, will satisfactorily answer
every question which it is proper for him to ask; for it contains all the information which our
Creator sees it best that His human creatures should, at present, possess.
II. Their surpassing value.
1. In possessing the Scriptures we possess every real advantage that would result from the
establishment of an oracle among us; and more. For wherever the oracle might be placed, it
would unavoidably be at a distance from a large proportion of those who wished for its
advice. But in the Scriptures we possess an oracle, which may be brought home to every
family and every individual at all times.
2. But in consequence of having been familiar with them from our childhood, we are far
from being sensible how deeply we are indebted to them. We must place ourselves in the
situation of a serious inquirer after truth, who has pursued his inquiries as far as unassisted
intellect can go; and that he now finds himself bewildered in a maze of conflicting theories

into which the researches of men unenlightened by revelation inevitably plunge them. To
such a man what would the Scripture be worth? He asks, “Who made the universe?” A mild,
but majestic voice replies from the oracle, “In the beginning, God created the heavens, and
the earth.” Startled, the inquirer eagerly exclaims, “Who is God—what is His nature?” “God,”
replies the voice, “is a spirit, wise, almighty, holy, just, merciful and gracious, long suffering,”
etc. The inquirer’s mind labours, faints, while vainly attempting to grasp the Being, now, for
the first time disclosed. But a new and more powerful motive now stimulates his inquiries,
and he asks, “Does any relation subsist between this God and myself?” “He is thy Maker,
Father, Preserver, Sovereign, Judge; in Him thou dost live, and move, and exist; and at
death thy spirit will return to God who gave it.” “How,” resumes the inquirer, “will He then
receive me?” “He will reward thee according to thy works.” “What works?” “Thou shalt love
the Lord thy God, with all thy heart,” etc. “Every transgression of this law is a sin; and the
soul that sinneth shall die.” “Have I sinned?” the inquirer tremblingly asks. “All,” replies the
oracle, “have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” A new sensation of conscious guilt
now oppresses the inquirer, and with increased anxiety he asks, “Is there any way in which
the pardon of sin may be obtained?” “The blood of Jesus Christ,” replies the oracle,
“cleanseth from all sin. He that confesseth and forsaketh his sins shall find mercy.” “But to
whom shall I confess them? where find the God whom I have offended?” “He is a God at
hand,” returns the voice; “I, who speak to thee, am He.” “God be merciful to me a sinner,”
exclaims the inquirer, not daring to lift his eyes towards the oracle: “What, Lord, wilt Thou
have me to do?” “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ,” answers the voice, “and thou shalt be
saved.” “Lord, who is Jesus Christ? that I may believe on Him? He is My Beloved Son, whom
I have set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood; hear thou Him, for there is
salvation in no other.” Such are, probably, some of the questions which would be asked by
the supposed inquirer; and such are, in substance, the answers which he would receive from
the oracles of God. Who can compute the value of these answers.
III. Their inexhaustibleness. But why should those consult them who are already acquainted
with the answers which they will return?
1. Has the man who asks this drawn from the Scriptures all the information which they
contain? It may reasonably be doubted whether anyone would have discovered that the
declaration of Jehovah, “I am the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob,” furnishes a
conclusive proof of the after existence of the human soul. And how many times might we
have read the declaration, “Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec,” before
we should have suspected that it involves all those important consequences deduced from it
in the Epistle to the Hebrews? And many other passages remain to reward the researches of
future inquirers.
2. Many of the oracles contain an infinity of meaning which no mind can ever exhaust. What
finite mind will fully comprehend all that is contained in the titles given to Jehovah and
Christ, or in the words, “eternity,” “heaven;” “hell”? Now he who most frequently consults
the oracles will penetrate most deeply into their unfathomable abyss of meaning. He may,
indeed, receive the same answers to his inquiries; but these answers will convey to his mind
clearer and more enlarged conceptions of the truths which they reveal. His views will
resemble those of an astronomer, who is, from time to time, furnished with telescopes of
greater power; or what at first seemed only an indistinct shadow, will become a vivid picture,
and the picture will, at length, stand out in bold relief. The lisping child and the astronomer
use the word “sun” to denote the same object. The child, however, means by this word,
nothing more than a round, luminous body, of a few inches in diameter. But it would require
a volume to contain all the conceptions of which this word stands for the sign in the mind of
the astronomer.

IV. Their vitalising power. It may, perhaps, be objected that, as the Scriptures do not speak in
an audible voice, their answers can never possess that life which attends the responses of a living
oracle, such as was formerly established among the Jews. On the contrary, they are well termed
lively or “living oracles”—“alive and powerful.” “The words,” says Christ, “that I speak unto you,
are spirit, and they are life.” The living God lives in them, and employs their instrumentality in
imparting life. Take away His accompanying influences, and the living oracles become “a dead
letter.” But he who consults them aright does not find them a dead letter; he finds that the
living, life-giving Spirit, by whom they were and are inspired, carries home their words to him
with an energy which no tongue can express.
V. The manner in which they are to be consulted. Thousands, of course, derive no benefit, and
receive no satisfactory answers, for they do not consult them, as an oracle of God ever ought to
be consulted.
1. They do not consult them with becoming reverence. They peruse them with little more
reverence than the works of a human author, as they would consult a dictionary or an
almanac.
2. Nor is sincerity less necessary than reverence—a real desire to know our duty, with a full
determination to believe and obey the answers we shall receive. If we consult the oracles of
God with a view to gratify our sinful inclinations, or to justify our questionable pursuits,
practices, or favourite prejudices, the oracle will be dumb. The same remark is applicable to
everyone who consults the Scriptures, while he neglects known duties, or disobeys known
commands. We may see these remarks exemplified in Saul. He had been guilty of known
disobedience; and therefore, when he inquired of the Lord, the Lord answer him not.
3. There are others whose want of success is owing to their unbelief. As no food can nourish
those who do not partake of it; as no medicines can prove salutary to those who refuse to
make use of them; so no oracles can be serviceable to those by whom they are not believed
with a cordial, practical, operative faith. The Scriptures are able to make us wise unto
salvation only through faith in Christ Jesus.
4. Many persons derive no benefit from the oracles of God, because they attempt to consult
them without prayer. Consulting an oracle is an act which, in its very nature, implies an
acknowledgment of ignorance, and a petition for guidance, for instruction. He, then, who
reads the Scriptures without prayer, does not really consult them. (E. Payson, D. D.)
The oracles of God: accessible to all
A priest observing to William Tyndale, “We are better without God’s laws than the Pope’s,” “I
defy the Pope and all his laws,” he replied; and added, “If God spare my life, ere many years I
will cause the boy which driveth the plough to know more of Scripture than you do.” (Quarterly
Review.)
The oracles of God: accessible to all
A Roman Catholic priest in Ireland recently discovered a peasant reading the Bible, and
reproved him for daring to peruse a book forbidden to the laity. The peasant proceeded to justify
himself by a reference to the contents of the book, and the holy doctrines which it taught. The
priest replied, that the doctrines could only be understood by the learned, and that ignorant men
would wrest them to their own destruction. “But,” said the peasant, “I am authorised, your
reverence, to read the Bible; I have a search warrant.” “What do you mean, sir?” said the priest,

in anger. “Why,” replied the peasant, “Jesus Christ says, ‘Search the Scriptures; for in them ye
think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me.’” The argument was
unanswerable.
The oracles of God: how to consult
“How am I to know the Word of God?” By studying it with the help of the Holy Ghost. As an
American bishop said, “Not with the blue light of Presbyterianism, nor the red light of
Methodism, nor the violet light of Episcopacy, but with the clear light of Calvary.” We must
study it on our knees, in a teachable spirit. If we know our Bible Satan will not have much power
over us, and we will have the world under our feet. (D. L. Moody.)
The oracles of God: may be consulted with perfect confidence
If a man in the night, by the light of a lamp, is trying to make out his chart, and there is storm in
the heavens and storm upon the sea, and someone knocks that lamp out of his hand, what is
done? The storm is above and the storm is below, and the chart lies dark, so that he cannot find
it out—that is all. If it were daylight he could see the chart well enough; but there being no light,
and the lamp on which he depended for light being knocked out of his hand, he cannot avail
himself of that which is before him. And the same is true concerning much of the Bible. It is an
interpreter. It is a lamp to our feet and a light to our path. And those truths which have their
exposition in the Bible, and which are a revelation of the structure of the world and of the Divine
nature and government, do not depend for their truth upon the Bible itself. They are only
interpreted and made plain by it. (H. W. Beecher.)
The oracles of God: never consulted in vain
How marvellous is the adaptation of Scripture for the race for whom it was revealed! In its pages
every conceivable condition of human experience is reflected as in a mirror. In its words every
struggle of the heart can find appropriate and forceful expression. It is absolutely inexhaustible
in its resources for the conveyance of the deepest feelings of the soul. It puts music into the
speech of the tuneless one, and rounds the periods of the unlettered into an eloquence which no
orator can rival. It has martial odes to brace the warrior’s courage, and gainful proverbs to teach
the merchant wisdom; all mental moods can represent themselves in its amplitude of words. It
can translate the doubt of the perplexed; it can articulate the cry of the contrite; it fills the
tongue of the joyous with carols of thankful gladness; and it gives sorrow words, lest grief, that
does not speak, should whisper to the heart, and bid it break. Happy we, who, in all the varieties
of our religious life, have this copious manual Divinely provided to our hand. (W. M. Punshon.)
The oracles of God: suppose they should be taken away
I thought I was at home, and that, on taking up my Bible one morning, I found, to my surprise,
what seemed to be the old familiar book was a total blank; not a character was inscribed in or
upon it. On going into the street I found everyone complaining in similar perplexity of the same
loss; and before night it became evident that a great and wonderful miracle had been wrought in
the world; the Hand which had written its awful menace on the walls of Belshazzar’s palace had
reversed the miracle, and expunged from our Bibles every syllable they contained—thus
reclaiming the most precious gift Heaven had bestowed and ungrateful man had abused. I was
curious to watch the effects of this calamity on the varied characters of mankind. There was,

however, universally an interest in the Bible, now it was lost, such as had never attached to it
while it was possessed. Some to whom the sacred book had been a blank for twenty years, and
who never would have known of their loss but for the lamentations of their neighbours, were not
the less vehement in their expressions of sorrow. The calamity not only stirred the feelings of
men, but it immediately stimulated their ingenuity to repair their loss. It was very early
suggested that the whole Bible had again and again been quoted piecemeal in one book or
another; that it had impressed its image on human literature, and had been reflected on its
surface as the stars on a stream. But, alas! on inspection it was found that every text, every
phrase which had been quoted, whether in books of theology, poetry, or fiction, had been
remorselessly obliterated. It was with trembling hand that some made the attempt to transcribe
the erased texts from memory. They feared that the writing would surely fade away; but, to their
unspeakable joy, they found the impression durable; and people at length came to the
conclusion that God left them at liberty, if they could, to reconstruct the Bible for themselves,
out of their collective remembrances of its contents. Some obscure individuals who had studied
nothing else but the Bible, but who had well studied that, came to be the objects of reverence
among Christians and booksellers; but he who could fill up a chasm by the restoration of words
which were only partially remembered was regarded as a public benefactor. At length a great
movement was projected amongst the divines of all denominations to collate the results of these
partial recoveries of the sacred text. But here it was curious to see the variety of different
readings of the same passages insisted on by conflicting theologians. No doubt the worthy men
were generally unconscious of the influence of prejudice; yet somehow the memory was seldom
so clear in relation to texts which told against as in relation to those which told for their several
theories. It was curious, too, to see by what odd associations of contrast, or sometimes of
resemblance, obscure texts were recovered. A miser contributed a maxim of prudence which he
recollected principally from having systematically abused. All the ethical maxims were soon
collected; for though, as usual, no one recollected his own peculiar duties or infirmities,
everyone kindly remembered those of his neighbours. As for Solomon’s “times for everything.”
few could recall the whole, but everybody remembered some. Undertakers said there was “a
time to mourn,” and comedians said there was “a time to laugh”; young ladies innumerable
remembered there was “a time to love,” and people of all kinds that there was “a time to hate”;
everybody knew that there was “a time to speak,” but a worthy Quaker added that there was also
“a time to keep silence.” But the most amusing thing of all was to see the variety of speculations
which were entertained concerning the object and design of this strange event. Many gravely
questioned whether it could be right to attempt the reconstruction of a book of which God
Himself had so manifestly deprived the world; and some, who were secretly glad to be relieved
of so troublesome a monitor, were particularly pious on this head, and exclaimed bitterly against
this rash attempt to counteract the decrees of Heaven. Some even maintained that the visitation
was not in judgment but in mercy; that God in compassion, and not in indignation, had taken
away a book which men had regarded with an extravagant admiration and idolatry; and that, if a
rebuke at all was intended, it was a rebuke to a rampant Bibliolatry. This last reason, which
assigned as the cause of God’s resumption of His own gift an extravagant admiration and
reverence of it on the part of mankind—it being so notorious that even the best of those who
professed belief in its Divine origin and authority had so grievously neglected it—struck me as so
ludicrous that I broke into a fit of laughter, which awoke me. The morning sun was streaming in
at the window and shining upon the open Bible which lay on the table; and it was with joy that
my eyes rested upon those words, which I read with grateful tears—“The gifts of God are without
repentance.” (H. Rogers.)
The Bible

I. Its possession is an immense “advantage” to any people. What distinguishes it from all other
books, and gives it transcendent worth, is that it contains the “oracles of God.”
1. They are infinitely valuable in themselves. They are infallible truth. The “oracles” of the
heathen world were gross deceptions, that of Apollo at Delphi was a notorious imposture.
They give—
(1) A true revelation of God to man.
(2) A true revelation of man to himself. Who can estimate the transcendent worth of
such revelations?
2. They are infinitely valuable in their influence.
(1) Intellectually. They quicken reason and set the wheels of thought ageing.
(2) Socially. They unseal the fountains of social sympathy, and bless the people with
philanthropic societies and institutions.
(3) Politically. They break down tyrannies, promote wholesome laws, and foster fair
dealing, peace, and liberty.
(4) Spiritually. Their great work is to generate, develope, and perfect the highest
spiritual life.
II. There are those who lack true faith in it. “What if some did not believe?” Though the Jews, as
a people, had the “oracles,” there were multitudes amongst them who were destitute of faith.
Their conduct during their pilgrimage, their whole history in Canaan, and the rejection of the
true Messiah, all proved they had little or no faith in the “oracles” they possessed. How few,
today, who possess the Bible have any true faith in the Divine “oracles.” To such the Bible—
1. Is of no real spiritual “advantage.” It can convey no real benefit to the soul, only so far as
its truths are believed and realised. Unless it is believed it has no more power to help the
soul, the man, than the genial sunbeam or the fertilising shower to help the tree that is
rotten at its roots.
2. It ultimately becomes a curse. It heightens responsibility and augments guilt. “If I had not
come and spoken unto them, they had not known sin.”
III. The lack of faith is it neither affects its reality nor lessens its importance (verse 3). Man’s
lack of faith will neither affect nor nullify the faithfulness of God. Facts are independent of
denials or affirmations. What if some say there is no God? Their denial does not destroy the fact,
He still exists. What if some say there is no hell; hell still burns on. Though all Europe denied
that the earth moved, it still pursued its course circling round the sun. But though our states of
mind, whether credulous or incredulous, in no way affect those facts, they vitally affect our own
character and destiny. What if we do not believe? It matters nothing to the universe or to God,
but it matters much, nay everything to us. (D. Thomas, D. D.)
The Bible given for guidance
Here is a man going over a mountain. Night falls and he is lost. He sees a light in a cabin
window. He hastens up to it. The mountaineer comes out and says, “I will furnish you with a
lantern.” The man does not say, “I don’t like the handle, and I don’t like the shape of this
lantern; it is octangular; it ought to be round; if you can’t give me a better one, I won’t take any.”
Oh, no. He starts on with it. He wants to get home. That lantern shines on the path all the way
through the mountain. Now, what is the Bible? Have we any right to say we do not like this or
that in it, when God intended it for a lamp for our feet and a lantern for our path to guide us

through our wilderness march, and bring us at last to our Father’s house on high? (T. De Witt
Talmage.)
The use of the Bible
The Rev. E.T. Taylor, commonly known as Father Taylor, addressing a number of sailors, said, “I
say, shipmates, now look me full in the face. What should we say of the man aboard ship who
was always talking about his compass, and never using it? What should you think of the man
who, when the storm is gathering, night at hand, moon and stars shut, on a lee shore, breakers
ahead, then first begins to remember his compass, and says, ‘Oh, what a nice compass I have got
on board,’ if before that time he has never looked at it? Where is it that you keep your compass?
Do you stow it away in the hold? Do you clap it into the forepeak?” By this time Jack’s face, that
unerring index of the soul, showed visibly that the reductio ad absurdum had begun to tell.
Then came, by a natural logic, as correct as that of the school, the improvement. “Now, then,
brethren, listen to me. Believe not what the scoffer and the infidel say. The Bible, the Bible is the
compass of life. Keep it always at hand. Steadily, steadily fix your eye on it. Study your bearing
by it. Make yourself acquainted with all its points. It will serve you in calm and in storm, in the
brightness of noonday, and amid the blackness of night; it will carry you over every sea, in every
clime, and navigate you, at last, into the harbour of eternal rest.”
The Bible a national advantage
Father Hyacinths, an eloquent and fearless priest in Paris, while recently preaching a charity
sermon in Lyons, in behalf of the asylum for the poor, having asked his audience, which was
composed of the principal Roman Catholic families, if they knew why Prussia triumphed on the
field of battle in the war with Austria, said, “It is because the nation is more enlightened, more
religious, and because every Prussian soldier has the Bible in his knapsack. I will add, that what
produces the power and superiority of Protestant peoples is, that they possess and read the Bible
at their own firesides. I have been twice in England, and have learned that the Bible is the
strength of that nation.”
EBC, “JEWISH CLAIMS: NO HOPE IN HUMAN MERIT
As the Apostle dictates, there rises before his mind a figure often seen by his eyes, the Rabbinic
disputant. Keen, subtle, unscrupulous, at once eagerly in earnest yet ready to use any argument
for victory, how often that adversary had crossed his path, in Syria, in Asia Minor, in Macedonia,
in Achaia! He is present now to his consciousness, within the quiet house of Gaius; and his
questions come thick and fast, following on this urgent appeal to his, alas! almost impenetrable
conscience.
"What then is the advantage of the Jew? Or what is the profit of circumcision? If some did not
believe, what of that? Will their faithlessness cancel God’s good faith?" "But if our
unrighteousness sets off God’s righteousness, would God be unjust, bringing His wrath to bear?"
We group the questions together thus, to make it the clearer that we do enter here, at this
opening of the third chapter, upon a brief controversial dialogue; perhaps the almost verbatim
record of many a dialogue actually spoken. The Jew, pressed hard with moral proofs of his
responsibility, must often have turned thus upon his pursuer, or rather have tried thus to escape
from him in the subtleties of a false appeal to the faithfulness of God.
And first he meets the Apostle’s stern assertion that circumcision without spiritual reality will
not save. He asks, where then is the advantage of Jewish descent? What is the profit, the good,

of circumcision? It is a mode of reply not unknown in discussions on Christian ordinances;
"What then is the good of belonging to a historic Church at all? What do you give the divine
Sacraments to do?" The Apostle answers his questioner at once; Much, in every way; first,
because they were entrusted with the Oracles of God. "First," as if there were more to say in
detail. Something, at least, of what is here left unsaid is said later, Rom_9:4-5, where he
recounts the long roll of Israel’s spiritual and historical splendours; "the adoption, and the glory,
and the covenants, and the law giving, and the worship, and the promises, and the Fathers, and
the Christ." Was it nothing to be bound up with things like these, in a bond made at once of
blood relationship, holy memories, and magnificent hopes? Was it nothing to be exhorted to
righteousness, fidelity, and love by finding the individual life thus surrounded? But here he
places "first" of even these wonderful treasures this, that Israel was "entrusted with the Oracles
of God," the Utterances of God, His unique Message to man "through His prophets, in the Holy
Scriptures." Yes, here was something which gave to the Jew an "advantage" without which the
others would either have had no existence, or no significance. He was the trustee of Revelation.
In his care was lodged the Book by which man was to live and die; through which he was to
know immeasurably more about God and about himself than he could learn from all other
informants put together. He, his people, his Church, were the "witness and keeper of Holy Writ."
And, therefore, to be born of Israel and ritually entered into the covenant of Israel, was to be
born into the light of revelation, and committed to the care of the witnesses and keepers of the
light.
To insist upon this immense privilege is altogether to St. Paul’s purpose here. For it is a privilege
which evidently carries an awful responsibility with it. What would be the guilt of the soul, and
of the Community, to whom those Oracles were-not given as property, but entrusted-and who
did not do the things they said?
Again the message passes on to the Israel of the Christian Church. "What advantage hath the
Christian? What profit is there of Baptism?" "Much, in every way; first, because to the Church is
entrusted the light of revelation." To be born in it, to be baptised in it, is to be born into the
sunshine of revelation, and laid on the heart and care of the Community which witnesses to the
genuineness of its Oracles and sees to their preservation and their spread. Great is the talent.
Great is the accountability.
But the Rabbinist goes on. For if some did not believe, what of that? Will their faithlessness
cancel God’s good faith? These Oracles of God promise interminable glories to Israel, to Israel as
a community, a body. Shall not that promise hold good for the whole mass, though some (bold
euphemism for the faithless multitudes!) have rejected the Promiser? Will not the unbelieving
Jew, after all, find his way to life eternal for his company’s sake, for his part and lot in the
covenant community? "Will God’s faith," His good faith, His plighted word, be reduced to empty
sounds by the bad Israelite’s sin? Away with the thought, the Apostle answers. Anything is more
possible than that God should lie. Nay, let God prove true, and every man prove liar; as it stands
written, (Psa_51:4) "That Thou mightest be justified in Thy words, and mightest overcome when
Thou impleadest." He quotes the Psalmist in that deep utterance of self-accusation, where he
takes part against himself, and finds himself guilty "without one plea," and, in the loyalty of the
regenerate and now awakened soul, is jealous to vindicate the justice of his condemning God.
The whole Scripture contains no more impassioned, yet no more profound and deliberate,
utterance of the eternal truth that God is always in the right or He would be no God at all; that it
is better, and more reasonable, to doubt anything than to doubt His righteousness, whatever
cloud surrounds it, and whatever lightning bursts the cloud.
But again the caviller, intent not on God’s glory, but on his own position, takes up the word. But
if our unrighteousness exhibits, sets off, God’s righteousness, if our sin gives occasion to grace to
abound, if our guilt lets the generosity of God’s Way of Acceptance stand out the more wonderful

by contrast-what shall we say? Would God be unjust, bringing His (την) wrath to bear on us,
when our pardon would illustrate His free grace? Would He be unjust? Would He not be unjust?
We struggle, in our paraphrase, to bring out the bearing, as it seems to us, of a passage of almost
equal grammatical difficulty and argumentative subtlety. The Apostle seems to be "in a strait"
between the wish to represent the caviller’s thought, and the dread of one really irreverent word.
He throws the man’s last question into a form which, grammatically, expects a "no" when the
drift of the thought would lead us up to a shocking "yes." And then at once he passes to his
answer. "I speak as man," man-wise; as if this question of balanced rights and wrongs were one
between man and man, not between man and eternal God. Such talk, even for argument’s sake,
is impossible for the regenerate soul except under urgent protest. Away with the thought that He
would not be righteous, in His punishment of any given sin. "Since how shall God judge the
world?" How, on such conditions, shall we repose on the ultimate fact that He is the universal
Judge? If He could not, righteously, punish a deliberate sin because pardon, under certain
conditions, illustrates His glory, then He could not punish any sin at all. But He is the Judge; He
does bring wrath to bear!’
Now he takes up the caviller on his own ground, and goes all lengths upon it, and then flies with
abhorrence from it. For if God’s truth, in the matter of my lie, has abounded, has come more
amply out, to His glory, why am I too called to judgment as a sinner? And why not say, as the
slander against us goes, and as some assert that we do say, "Let us do the ill that the good may
come"? So they assert of us. But their doom is just, -the doom of those who would utter such a
maxim, finding shelter for a lie under the throne of God.
No doubt he speaks from a bitter and frequent experience when he takes this particular case,
and with a solemn irony claims exemption for himself from the liar’s, sentence of death. It is
plain that the charge of untruth was, for some reason or another, often thrown at St. Paul; we
see this in the marked urgency with which, from time to time, he asserts his truthfulness; "The
things which I say, behold, before God I lie not"; (Gal_1:20) "I speak the truth in Christ and lie
not". (Rom_9:1) Perhaps the manifold sympathies of his heart gave innocent occasion
sometimes for the charge. The man who could be "all things to all men," (1Co_9:22) taking with
a genuine insight their point of view, and saying things which showed that he took it, would be
very likely to be set down by narrower minds as untruthful. And the very boldness of his
teaching might give further occasion, equally innocent; as he asserted at different times, with
equal emphasis, opposite sides of truth. But these somewhat subtle excuses for false witness
against this great master of holy sincerity would not be necessary where genuine malice was at
work. No man is so truthful that he cannot be charged with falsehood; and no charge is so likely
to injure even where it only feigns to strike. And of course the mighty paradox of Justification
lent itself easily to the distortions, as well as to the contradictions, of sinners. "Let us do evil that
good may come" no doubt represented the report which prejudice and bigotry would regularly
carry away and spread after every discourse, and every argument, about free Forgiveness. It is so
still: "If this is true, we may live as we like; if this is true, then the worst sinner makes the best
saint." Things like this have been current sayings since Luther, since Whitefield, and till now.
Later in the Epistle we shall see the unwilling evidence which such distortions bear to the nature
of the maligned doctrine; but here the allusion is too passing to bring this out.
"Whose doom is just." What a witness is this to the inalienable truthfulness of the Gospel! This
brief stern utterance absolutely repudiates all apology for means by end; all seeking of even the
good of men by the way of saying the thing that is not. Deep and strong, almost from the first,
has been the temptation to the Christian man to think otherwise, until we find whole systems of
casuistry developed whose aim seems to be to go as near the edge of untruthfulness as possible,
if not beyond it, in religion. But the New Testament sweeps the entire idea of the pious fraud
away, with this short thunder peal, "Their doom is just." It will hear of no unholiness that leaves

out truthfulness; no word, no deed, no habit, that even with the purest purpose belies the God of
reality and veracity.
If we read aright Act_24:20-21, with Act_23:6, we see St. Paul himself once, under urgent
pressure of circumstances, betrayed into an equivocation, and then, publicly and soon,
expressing his regret of conscience. "I am a Pharisee, and a Pharisee’s son; about the hope and
resurrection of the dead I am called in question." True, true in fact, but not the whole truth, not
the unreserved account of his attitude towards the Pharisee. Therefore, a week later, he
confesses, does he not? that in this one thing there was "evil in him, while he stood before the
council." Happy the Christian, happy indeed the Christian public man, immersed in
management and discussion, whose memory is as clear about truth telling, and whose
conscience is as sensitive!
What then? are we superior? Say not so at all. Thus now he proceeds, taking the word finally
from his supposed antagonist. Who are the "we," and with whom are "we" compared? The drift
of the argument admits of two replies to this question. "We" may be "we Jews"; as if Paul placed
himself in instinctive sympathy, by the side of the compatriot whose cavils he has just combated,
and gathered up here into a final assertion all he has said before of the (at least) equal guilt of
the Jew beside the Greek. Or "we" may be "we Christians," taken for the moment as men apart
from Christ; it may be a repudiation of the thought that he has been speaking from a pedestal, or
from a tribunal. As if he said, "Do not think that I, or my friends in Christ, would say to the
world, Jewish or Gentile, that we are holier than you. No; we speak not from the bench, but from
the bar. Apart from Him who is our peace and life, we are ‘in the same condemnation.’ It is
exactly because we are in it that we turn and say to you, ‘Do not ye fear God?"’ On the whole, this
latter reference seems the truer to the thought and spirit of the whole context.
For we have already charged Jews and Greeks, all of them, with being under sin; with being
brought under sin, as the Greek bids us more exactly render, giving us the thought that the race
has fallen from a good estate into an evil; self-involved in an awful super-incumbent ruin. As it
stands written, that there is not even one man righteous; there is not a man who understands,
not a man who seeks his (τ;ν) God. All have left the road; they have turned worthless together.
There is not a man who does what is good, there is not. even so many as one. A grave set open is
their throat, exhaling the stench of polluted words; with their tongues they have deceived; asp’s
venom is under their lips; (men) whose mouth is brimming with curse and bitterness. Swift are
their feet to shed blood; ruin and misery for their victims are in their ways; and the way of peace
they never knew. There is no such thing as fear of God before their eyes.
Here is a tesselation of Old Testament oracles. The fragments, hard and dark, come from divers
quarries; from the Psalms, (Psa_5:9; Psa_10:7; Psa_14:1-3; Psa_36:1; Psa_140:3) from the
Proverbs, (Pro_1:16) from Isaiah. (Isa_59:7) All in the first instance depict and denounce classes
of sins and sinners in Israelite society; and we may wonder at first sight how their evidence
convicts all men everywhere, and in all time, of condemnable and fatal sin. But we need not
only, in submission, own that somehow it must be so, for "it stands written" here; we may see, in
part, now it is so. These special charges against certain sorts of human lives stand in the same
Book which levels the general charge against "the human heart," (Jer_17:9) that it is "deceitful
above all things, hopelessly diseased," and incapable of knowing all its own corruption. The
crudest surface phenomena of sin are thus never isolated from the dire underlying epidemic of
the race of man. The actual evil of men shows the potential evil of man. The tiger strokes of open
wickedness show the tiger nature, which is always present, even when its possessor least
suspects it. Circumstances infinitely vary, and among them those internal circumstances which
we call special tastes and dispositions. But everywhere amidst them all is the human heart, made
upright in its creation, self-wrecked into moral wrongness when it turned itself from God. That
it is turned from Him, not to Him, appears when its direction is tested by the collision between

His claim and its will And in this aversion from the Holy One, who claims the whole heart, there
lies at least the potency of "all unrighteousness."
Long after this, as his glorious rest drew near, St. Paul wrote again of the human heart, to "his
true son" Titus. (Tit_3:3) He reminds him of the wonder of that saving grace which he so fully
unfolds in this Epistle; how, "not according to our works," the "God who loveth man" had saved
Titus, and saved Paul. And what had he saved them from? From a state in which they were
"disobedient, deceived, the slaves of divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy,
hateful, hating one another." What, the loyal and laborious Titus, the chaste, the upright, the
unutterably earnest Paul? Is not the picture greatly, lamentably exaggerated, a burst of religious
rhetoric? Adolphe Monod tells us that he once thought it must be so; he felt himself quite unable
to submit to the awful witness. But years moved, and he saw deeper into himself, seeing deeper
into the holiness of God; and the truthfulness of that passage grew upon him. Not that its
difficulties all vanished, but its truthfulness shone out, "and sure I am," he said from his death
bed, "that when this veil of flesh shall fall I shall recognise in that passage the truest portrait ever
painted of my own natural heart."
Robert Browning, in a poem of terrible moral interest and power, confesses that, amidst a
thousand doubts and difficulties, his mind was anchored to faith in Christianity by the fact of its
doctrine of Sin:
"I still, to suppose it true, for my part See reasons and reasons; this, to begin; ‘Tis the faith that
launched point-blank her dart At the head of a lie; taught Original Sin, The Corruption of Man’s
Heart."
Now we know that whatever things the Law says, it speaks them to those in the Law, those
within its range, its dominion; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may. prove
guilty with regard to God. "The Law"; that is to say, here, the Old Testament Revelation. This not
only contains the Mosaic and Prophetic moral code, but has it for one grand pervading object, in
all its parts, to prepare man for Christ by exposing him to himself, in his shame and need. It
shows him in a thousand ways that "he cannot serve the Lord," (Jos_24:19) on purpose that in
that same Lord he may take refuge from both his guilt and his impotency. And this it does for
"those in the Law"; that is to say here, primarily, for the Race, the Church, whom it surrounded
with its light of holy fire, and whom in this passage the Apostle has in his first thoughts. Yet
they, surely, are not alone upon his mind. We have seen already how "the Law" is, after all, only
the more full and direct enunciation of "law"; so that the Gentile as well as the Jew has to do
with the light, and with the responsibility, of a knowledge of the will of God. While the chain of
stern quotations we have just handled lies heaviest on Israel, it yet binds the world. It "shuts
every mouth." It drags man in guilty before God.
"That every mouth may be stopped." Oh, solemn silence, when at last it comes! The harsh or
muffled voices of self-defence, of self-assertion are hushed at length. The man, like one of old,
when he saw his righteous self in the light of God, "lays his hand on his mouth". (Job_11:4) He
leaves speech to God, and learns at last to listen. What shall he hear? An external repudiation?
An objurgation, and then a final and exterminating anathema? No, something far other, and
better, and more wonderful. But there must first be silence on man’s part, if it is to be heard.
"Hear-and your souls shall live."
So the great argument pauses, gathered up into an utterance which at once concentrates what
has gone before, and prepares us for a glorious sequel. Shut thy mouth, O man, and listen now:
Because by means of works of law there shall be justified no flesh in His presence; for by means
of law comes moral knowledge of sin.

HERY, “Here the apostle answers several objections, which might be made, to clear his
way. o truth so plain and evident but wicked wits and corrupt carnal hearts will have
something to say against it; but divine truths must be cleared from cavil.
Object. 1. If Jew and Gentile stand so much upon the same level before God, what
advantage then hath the Jew? Hath not God often spoken with a great deal of respect for
the Jews, as a non.such people (Deut. xxxiii. 29), a holy nation, a peculiar treasure, the seed
of Abraham his friend: Did not he institute circumcision as a badge of their church.
membership, and a seal of their covenant.relation to God? ow does not this levelling
doctrine deny them all such prerogatives, and reflect dishonour upon the ordinance of
circumcision, as a fruitless insignificant thing.
Answer. The Jews are, notwithstanding this, a people greatly privileged and honoured,
have great means and helps, though these be not infallibly saving (v. 2): Much every way.
The door is open to the Gentiles as well as the Jews, but the Jews have a fairer way up to
this door, by reason of their church.privileges, which are not to be undervalued, though
many that have them perish eternally for not improving them. He reckons up many of the
Jews' privileges Rom. ix. 4, 5; here he mentions but one (which is indeed instar omnium..
equivalent to all), that unto them were committed the oracles of God, that is, the scriptures
of the Old Testament, especially the law of Moses, which is called the lively oracles (Acts vii.
38), and those types, promises, and prophecies, which relate to Christ and the gospel. The
scriptures are the oracles of God: they are a divine revelation, they come from heaven, are
of infallible truth, and of eternal consequence as oracles. The Septuagint call the Urim and
Thummim the logia..the oracles. The scripture is our breast.plate of judgment. We must
have recourse to the law and to the testimony, as to an oracle. The gospel is called the
oracles of God, Heb. v. 12; 1 Pet. iv. 11. ow these oracles were committed to the Jews; the
Old Testament was written in their language; Moses and the prophets were of their nation,
lived among them, preached and wrote primarily to and for the Jews. They were
committed to them as trustees for succeeding ages and churches. The Old Testament was
deposited in their hands, to be carefully preserved pure and uncorrupt, and so transmitted
down to posterity. The Jews were the Christians' library.keepers, were entrusted with that
sacred treasure for their own use and benefit in the first place, and then for the advantage
of the world; and, in preserving the letter of the scripture, they were very faithful to their
trust, did not lose one iota or tittle, in which we are to acknowledge God's gracious care
and providence. The Jews had the means of salvation, but they had not the monopoly of
salvation. ow this he mentions with a chiefly, proton men gar..this was their prime and
principal privilege. The enjoyment of God's word and ordinances is the chief happiness of a
people, is to be put in the imprimis of their advantages, Deut. iv. 8; xxxiii. 3; Ps. cxlvii. 20.
Object. 2. Against what he had said of the advantages the Jews had in the lively oracles,
some might object the unbelief of many of them. To what purpose were the oracles of God
committed to them, when so many of them, notwithstanding these oracles, continued
strangers to Christ, and enemies to his gospel? Some did not believe, v. 3.
Answer. It is very true that some, nay most of the present Jews, do not believe in Christ;

but shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? The apostle startles at such a
thought: God forbid! The infidelity and obstinacy of the Jews could not invalidate and
overthrow those prophecies of the Messiah which were contained in the oracles committed
to them. Christ will be glorious, though Israel be not gathered, Isa. xlix. 5. God's words
shall be accomplished, his purposes performed, and all his ends answered, though there be
a generation that by their unbelief go about to make God a liar. Let God be true but every
man a liar; let us abide by this principle, that God is true to every word which he has
spoken, and will let none of his oracles fall to the ground, though thereby we give the lie to
man; better question and overthrow the credit of all the men in the world than doubt of the
faithfulness of God. What David said in his haste (Ps. cxvi. 11), that all men are liars, Paul
here asserts deliberately. Lying is a limb of that old man which we every one of us come
into the world clothed with. All men are fickle, and mutable, and given to change, vanity
and a lie (Ps. lxii. 9), altogether vanity, Ps. xxxix. 5. All men are liars, compared with God.
It is very comfortable, when we find every man a liar (no faith in man), that God is faithful.
When they speak vanity every one with his neighbour, it is very comfortable to think that
the words of the Lord are pure words, Ps. xii. 2, 6. For the further proof of this he quotes
Ps. li. 4, That thou mightest be justified, the design of which is to show, 1. That God does
and will preserve his own honour in the world, notwithstanding the sins of men. 2. That it is
our duty, in all our conclusions concerning ourselves and others, to justify God and to
assert and maintain his justice, truth, and goodness, however it goes. David lays a load
upon himself in his confession, that he might justify God, and acquit him from any
injustice. So here, Let the credit or reputation of man shift for itself, the matter is not great
whether it sink or swim; let us hold fast this conclusion, how specious soever the premises
may be to the contrary, that the Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works.
Thus is God justified in his sayings, and cleared when he judges (as it is Ps. li. 4), or when
he is judged, as it is here rendered. When men presume to quarrel with God and his
proceedings, we may be sure the sentence will go on God's side.
SBC, “
Preciousness of the Bible.
I. Think of the wonderful providence which has watched over the Bible from the beginning.
There is no miracle comparable to that which has preserved to us the Scriptures amid all the
convulsions of society, after so many centuries of persecution, neglect, superstition, and
ignorance—that we should still possess the writings of Moses in their freshness, what a miracle
of providence is that!
II. The Old Testament presupposes the New. Neither would be intelligible without the other.
And both alike have the same mysterious texture—call it typical, mystical, spiritual, or what you
will—whereby the common events of men’s lives and the ordinary course of human history are
found to be expressive of heavenly truths—to be instinct with divinest teaching woven into the
very midst of the sacred narrative; from the Alpha to the Omega of it are found the mysteries of
redemption, the secret purposes and practices of God. And why is all this but because God
Himself is in it, because His Spirit hath inspired it in every part? The Scripture is the very shrine
of the Eternal—the Holy of Holies, in which the Shekinah of Glory dwelleth, and where God’s
voice is heard speaking to man. It is called the Word of God, less because it is His utterance than
because it is Divine as well as human—shares the nature of Him whose name in heaven is even
now the Word of God. And need I dwell on the grand mystery of all, the awful circumstance that
the gospel not only discourses to us of the Eternal Son come in the flesh, but actually exhibits
Him to us? In what relation, then, to the ancient oracles of God is our Saviour Christ found to
stand as the constant witness to their infallible truth, their paramount value, their Divine origin?

They are for ever on His lips. What wonder if, in reply to the question as to what was the Jews’
advantage, the Apostle answered, "Much every way," chiefly because that unto them were
committed the oracles of God.
J. W. Burgon, Ninety-one Short Sermons, No. 3.
MEYER, “ GOD FAITHFUL THOUGH MEN BE FAITHLESS
Rom_3:1-8
The Jewish people had a great treasure entrusted to them for the benefit of the whole world.
This position as stewards for mankind conferred upon them very special privileges, but also
exposed them to searching discipline, if they should prove faithless. Some of these advantages
are enumerated in Rom_9:4-5. But our failures cannot cancel God’s faithfulness to His covenant
promises, 2Ti_2:13. We may always reckon confidently upon His steadfastness to His
engagements, whether to the individual or to the nation. It is wonderful, Rom_3:5, how human
sin has been a foil to God’s glory, eliciting qualities in His love which otherwise had been
unknown; but this cannot excuse our sinfulness.
If this excuse were admitted, God would clearly have been unjust in punishing sin as He has
done; and if that line of argument were maintained, it would be right to do evil, if good were
always the outcome. Such an admission would open the door to all kinds of abomination, and
the mere suggestion of such a conclusion to this argument ought to silence the objector and
cover him with shame.
riJb.itE <denIh Fanj.act isn wisIh asFanj.act
Rom. 3:1.8
What, then, is the something plus which belongs to a Jew? Or what special advantage
belongs to those who have been circumcised? Much in every way. In the first place, there is
this advantage..that the Jews have been entrusted with the oracles of God. Yes, you say, but
what if some of them were unfaithful to them? Surely you are not going to argue that their
infidelity invalidates the fidelity of God? God forbid! Let God be shown to be true, though
every man be shown to be a liar, as it stands written: "In order that you may be seen to be
in the right in your arguments, and that you may win your case when you enter into
judgment." But, you say, if our unrighteousness merely provides proof of God's
righteousness, what are we to say? Surely you are not going to try to argue that God is
unrighteous to unleash the Wrath upon you? (I am using human arguments:) God forbid!
For, if that were so, how shall God judge the world? But, you say, if the fact that I am false
merely provides a further opportunity to demonstrate the fact that God is true, to his
greater glory, why should I still be condemned as a sinner? Are you going to argue..just as
some slanderously allege that we suggest..that we should do evil that good may come of it?
Anyone can see that statements like that merit nothing but condemnation.
Here Paul is arguing in the closest and the most difficult way. It will make it easier to
understand if we remember that he is carrying on an argument with an imaginary objector.
The argument stated in full would run something like this.
The objector: The result of all that you have been saying is that there is no difference
between Gentile and Jew and that they are in exactly the same position. Do you really mean

that?
Paul: By no means.
The objector: What, then, is the difference?
Paul: For one thing, the Jew possesses what the Gentile never so directly possessed..the
commandments of God.
The objector: Granted! But what if some of the Jews disobeyed these commandments and
were unfaithful to God and came under his condemnation? You have just said that God
gave the Jews a special position and a special promise. ow you go on to say that at least
some of them are under the condemnation of God. Does that mean that God has broken his
promise and shown himself to be unjust and unreliable?
Paul: Far from it! What it does show is that there is no favouritism with God and that he
punishes sin wherever he sees it. The very fact that he condemns the unfaithful Jews is the
best possible proof of his absolute justice. He might have been expected to overlook the sins
of this special people of his but he does not.
The objector: Very well then! All you have done is to succeed in showing that my
disobedience has given God an opportunity to demonstrate his righteousness. My infidelity
has given God a marvellous opportunity to demonstrate his fidelity. My sin is, therefore, an
excellent thing! It has given God a chance to show how good he is! I may have done evil,
but good has come of it! You can't surely condemn a man for giving God a chance to show
his justice!
Paul: An argument like that is beneath contempt! You have only to state it to see how
intolerable it is!
When we disentangle this passage in this way, we see that there are in it certain basic
thoughts of Paul in regard to the Jews.
(i) To the end of the day he believed the Jews to be in a special position in regard to God.
That, in fact, is what they believed themselves. The difference was that Paul believed that
their special position was one of special responsibility; the Jew believed it to be one of
special privilege. What did Paul say that the Jew had been specially entrusted with? The
oracles of God. What does he mean by that? The word he uses is logia, the regular word in
the Greek Old Testament for a special statement or pronouncement of God. Here it means
The Ten Commandments. God entrusted the Jews with commandments, not privileges. He
said to them, "You are a special people; therefore you must live a special life." He did not
say, "You are a special people; therefore you can do what you like." He did say, "You are a
special people; therefore you must do what I like." When Lord Dunsany came in safety
through the 1914.18 war he tells us that he said to himself, "In some strange way I am still
alive. I wonder what God means me to do with a life so specially spared?" That thought
never struck the Jews. They never could grasp the fact that God's special choice was for
special duty.
(ii) All through his writings there are three basic facts in Paul's mind about the Jews. They
occur in embryo here; and they are in fact the three thoughts that it takes this whole letter
to work out. We must note that he does not place all the Jews under the one condemnation.
He puts it in this way: "What if some of them were unfaithful?"
(a) He was quite sure that God was justified in condemning the Jews. They had their
special place and their special promises; and that very fact made their condemnation all the
greater. Responsibility is always the obverse of privilege. The more opportunity a man has
to do right, the greater his condemnation if he does wrong.

(b) But not all of them were unfaithful. Paul never forgot the faithful remnant; and he was
quite sure that that faithful remnant..however small it was in numbers..was the true
Jewish race. The others had lost their privileges and were under condemnation. They were
no longer Jews at all. The remnant was the real nation.
(c) Paul was always sure that God's rejection of Israel was not final. Because of this
rejection, a door was opened to the Gentiles; and, in the end, the Gentiles would bring the
Jews back within the fold, and Gentile and Jew would be one in Christ. The tragedy of the
Jew was that the great task of world evangelization that he might have had, and was
designed to have, was refused by him. It was therefore given to the Gentiles, and God's plan
was, as it were, reversed, and it was not, as it should have been, the Jew who evangelized
the Gentile, but the Gentile who evangelized the Jew..a process which is still going on.
Further, this passage contains two great universal human truths.
(i) The root of all sin is disobedience. The root of the Jew's sin was disobedience to the
known law of God. As Milton wrote, it was "man's first disobedience" which was
responsible for paradise lost. When pride sets tip the will of man against the will of God,
there is sin. If there were no disobedience, there would be no sin.
(ii) Once a man has sinned, he displays an amazing ingenuity in justifying his sin. Here we
come across an argument that reappears again and again in religious thought, the
argument that sin gives God a chance to show at once his justice and his mercy and is
therefore a good thing. It is a twisted argument. One might as well argue..it would, in fact,
be the same argument..that it is a good thing to break a person's heart, because it gives him
a chance to show how much he loves you. When a man sins, the need is not for ingenuity to
justify his sin, but for humility to confess it in penitence and in shame.
2 Much in every way! First of all, they have been entrusted
with the very words of God.
?tW ed5v,Much every way - Or, in every respect. This is the answer of the apostle to the
objection in
Rom_3:1.
Chiefly - That is, this is the principal advantage, and one including all others. The main
benefit of being a Jew is, to possess the sacred Scriptures and their instructions.
Unto them were committed - Or were intrusted, were confided. The word translated
“were committed,” is what is commonly employed to express “faith” or “confidence,” and it
implied “confidence” in them on the part of God in intrusting his oracles to them; a confidence
which was not misplaced, for no people ever guarded a sacred trust or deposit with more fidelity,
than the Jews did the Sacred Scriptures.
The oracles - The word “oracle” among the pagan meant properly the answer or response of
a god, or of some priest supposed to be inspired, to an inquiry of importance, usually expressed
in a brief sententious way, and often with great ambiguity. The place from which such a
response was usually obtained was also called an oracle, as the oracle at Delphi, etc. These
oracles were frequent among the pagan, and affairs of great importance were usually submitted
to them. The word rendered “oracles” occurs in the New Testament but four times, Act_7:38;

Heb_5:12; 1Pe_4:11; Rom_3:2. It is evidently used here to denote the Scriptures, as being what
was spoken by God, and particularly perhaps the divine promises. To possess these was of
course an eminent privilege, and included all others, as they instructed them in their duty, and
were their guide in everything that pertained to them in this life and the life to come. They
contained, besides, many precious promises respecting the future dignity of the nation in
reference to the Messiah. No higher favor can be conferred on a people than to be put in
possession of the sacred Scriptures. And this fact should excite us to gratitude, and lead us to
endeavor to extend them also to other nations; compare Deu_4:7-8; Psa_147:19-20.
CLARKE, “Apostle. Much every way - The Jews, in reference to the means and motives of
obedience, enjoy many advantages beyond the Gentiles; and, principally, because to them were
committed the oracles of God - that revelation of his will to Moses and the prophets, containing
a treasure of excellencies, with which no other part of the world has been favored; though they
have most grievously abused these privileges.
GILL, “Much every way,.... The circumcised Jew has greatly the advantage of the
uncircumcised Gentile,
he,’W D-eRnDIRy((RstrotGvrneRa7W DW —eRnaIRt4ts2RrDwtneRyrRvitRcy,,DIrRroty58R
oisyrtrRvaRfiDGiRviDrRDIRvitRvt!vRyIrftsrUR
chieflychieflychieflyGiDtp(28RdastRtrotGDy((2eRoysvDG.(ys(2eRyIwRDIRvitRpDsrvRo(yGt8R
,tGy.rtRviyvR.IvaRvitdRftstRGaddDvvtwRvitRasyG(trRapR6aw,tGy.rtRviyvR.IvaRvitdRftstRGaddDvvtwRvitRasyG(trRapR6aw,tGy.rtRviyvR.IvaRvitdRftstRGaddDvvtwRvitRasyG(trRapR6aw,tGy.rtRviyvR.IvaRvitdRftstRGaddDvvtwRvitRasyG(trRapR6aw8R,2RfiDGiRystRdtyIvRvitR(yfRapRFartreRyIwR
vitRfsDvDIVrRapRvitRosaoitvreRvitRDIrvDv.vDaIrRapRvitRGtstdaIDy(R(yfeRyIwRvitRosaoitGDtrRapRvitRFtrrDyiRyIwR
vitR6arot(RGi.sGiRrvyvt8RyIwRDIRyRfasweRy((RvitR,aa5rRapRvitRz(wR{trvydtIveRyIwRfiyvrat4tsRDrRGaIvyDItwR
DIRvitd8RfiDGiRystRGy((twRraeR,tGy.rtRvit2RystRapRwD4DItRDIroDsyvDaIeRGaIvyDIRvitRdDIwRyIwRfD((RapR6aweRyIwR
ystRDIpy((D,(tRyIwRy.viasDvyvD4tURyIwRDvRfyrRvitRosD4D(tVtRyIwRosapDvRapRvitR}tfrRviyvRvit2RftstRDIvs.rvtwR
fDviRvitdeRfitIRavitsRIyvDaIrRftstRIaveRyIwRraRiywRvitRyw4yIvyVtRapRvitd8Rvit2RiywRvitdRpasRvitDsRafIR
.rt8RpasRitst,2Rvit2RiywRyRdastRG(tysRyIwRwDrvDIGvR5Iaf(twVtRapR6awRviyIRvitR6tIvD(trRGa.(wRiy4tR,2RvitR
(DVivRapRIyv.st8RyIwR,trDwtreR,tGydtRyG7.yDIvtwRfDviRvitRwaGvsDItrRapRyRvsDIDv2RapRotsraIrRDIRvitR6awityweR
apRvitRraIriDoRyIwRwtDv2RapRvitRFtrrDyieRapRvitRryGsDpDGteRryvDrpyGvDaIeRyIwRsDVivta.rItrrRapRvitRctwttdtseR
yIwRapRry(4yvDaIR,2RiDd8RyIwRy(raRfDviRvitRdyIItsRapRfasriDooDIVRapR6awRyGGaswDIVRvaRiDrRfD((8Ry((RfiDGiR
vitR6tIvD(trRftstRDVIasyIvRap.RFasta4tseRvit2RiywRvitRiaIa.sRapR,tDIVRvitR5ttotsrRapRvitrtRryGstwR,aa5reR
vitrtRwD4DItRasyG(treRyIwRapRvsyIrdDvvDIVRvitdRvaRoarvtsDv2eRpasRvitR.rtRapRavitsr.
&אדnןםלbונMuch every way; chiefly, because — rather, “first, that.”

unto them were committed the oracles of God — This remarkable expression, denoting
“divine communications” in general, is transferred to the Scriptures to express their oracular,
divine, authoritative character.
gtsFo 9v42.Much in every way, etc.; that is, very much. He begins here to give the sacrament its own
praise; but he concedes not, that on this
ACCOUNT the Jews ought to have been proud; for when he
teaches that they were sealed by the symbol of circumcision, by which they were counted the children of
God, he does not allow that they became superior to others through any merit or worthiness of their own, but
through the free mercy of God. If then regard be had to them as men, he shows that they were on a level
with others; but if the favors of God be taken to the account, he admits that they possessed what made them
more eminent than other men.
First indeed, because, intrusted to them, etc. Some think there is here an unfinished period, for he sets
down what he does not afterwards complete. But the word first seems not to me to be a note of NUMBER
, but means chiefly” or especially, (88) and is to be taken in this sense — “ it were but this one thing, that
they have the oracles
(89) of God committed to them, it might be deemed sufficient to prove their
superiority.” And it is worthy of being noticed, that the advantage of circumcision is not made to consist in the
naked sign, but its value is derived from the word; for Paul asks here what benefit the sacrament conferred
on the Jews, and he answers, that God had
DEPOSITED with them the treasure of celestial wisdom. It
hence follows, that, apart from the word, no excellency remained. By oracles he means the covenant which
God revealed first to Abraham and to his posterity, and afterwards sealed and unfolded by the law and the
Prophets.
Now the oracles were committed to them, for the purpose of preserving them as long as it pleased the Lord
to CONTINUE his glory among them, and then of publishing them during the time of their stewardship
through the whole world: they were first depositories, and secondly dispensers. But if this benefit was to be
so highly esteemed when the Lord favored one nation only with the revelation of his word, we can never
sufficiently reprobate our ingratitude, who receive his word with so much negligence or with so much
carelessness, not to say disdain.
(88) The word πρῶτον is thus used in other places. See Mat_6:33; Mar_7:27; 2Pe_1:20. — Ed.
(89) Λόγια oracula, mean, in Greek authors, divine responses. [Hesychius ] explains it by Θέσφατα — divine
dictates. The word is used four times in New Testament. In Act_7:38, it means specifically the law of Moses;
here it includes the whole of the Old Testament; in Heb_5:12, and in 1Pe_4:11, it embraces the truths of the
Gospel. The divine character of the Scriptures is by this word attested; they are the oracles of God, his
dictates, or communications from him. — Ed.
dJe!at 9v4;cuIvpNOGvCNSCvmMyCH9vcuvDAuCvIAHvVuNIvmMrst in a long list of advantages, though he did see
many advantages in being a Jew. What Paul means by first is "supremely, chiefly." The great glory in being a
Jew in Paul's day was that the Jews had the Law. They possessed the written Word of God. That advantage is
claimed today by many non.Jews, Catholics and Protestants who are proud of their knowledge of the Bible.
Paul says that is a tremendous advantage. Already he has shown that everyone is under law. Even the savages
in the jungle, who have no knowledge of the Bible or the Ten Commandments, still have the Law written in
HcuMyvcuNyHC8v A,ADSvMCvRMHcAOHvNvVAyNGvCHNIDNyD8vJhe conscience lays hold of that law written in the heart to
tell people whether they are doing right or wrong. So light is given to everyone. As John puts it in his Gospel,
"There is a light that lights everyone coming into HcuvRAyGD9?vH)m9v(AcIv3ELv oFI8v A,ADSvGMTuCvMIvDNykness.
But even though everyone has that light, the Jews had an additional degree of light. They were given the

written Word on stone, so that it was permanently preserved. Thus they had a knowledge of the mind and will
and character of God that other people did not possess. They had a greater opportunity to know and obey
God than anyone else in that day. Therefore they had a tremendous advantage. Implied in this is the fact that,
though the Jew had this tremendous advantage, he failed to make use of it, and therefore it did him no good
at all. He was no better off than if he had never known the Law at all because he did not put it to its intended
use.
This parallels the situation in our day. We have billions of people who have been raised in Sunday school and
church, who know the Scripture, and have even read the Bible from cover to cover. We live in a land where
Bibles are available by the dozens and we can take our choice of versions. The mind of God is available, and
yet millions of people are no better off than if they had never heard of the Bible. They are as lost as if they
were savages in the jungles of Africa because the light they have is not put to use.
Just imagine, for instance, an island in darkness, populated with people. There is only one way to escape the
island, a narrow bridge over a deep chasm, but the darkness is so great that only a few find their way over
that bridge. Everybody on that island has been provided with a little penlight that enables them to dimly
illuminate a small space around them, barely enough to avoid the more obvious obstacles in their path. But a
certain group of people is given a powerful searchlight that can shine thousands of yards into the darkness. It
is given to them not only so that they can find the bridge, but also so they can show others the way out. Yet
these people, who have so much more light than the others, spend their time utilizing this powerful
searchlight to look for needles in a haystack. They turn that searchlight on a mound of hay and search for
needles. That, in essence, was what the Jews were doing.
The rabbis were arguing constantly over infinitesimal theological differences. Jesus called this "straining at a
gnat, but swallowing a camel," {cf, Matt 23:24}. They argued over how many steps constituted a violation of
the Sabbath and whether spitting on a rock is permissible on the Sabbath, or whether spitting on mud is a
violation. One would be right, and the other wrong. This is what they used the Law for. Though the Jews had
a tremendous advantage in having the Law, Paul says, they failed to use it properly.
dpoWOeh 5v,.fivGilmvliuivO3CFmv)fu3Ic)yibEiiTium(v.hey had to guard the holy Books, "the oracles of
God." They had also to preserve the knowledge of the truth by those divers rites and ceremonies by which
God was pleased to reveal himself of old time.
3 What if some did not have faith? Will their lack of faith
nullify God's faithfulness?
?tW ed5v,For what if some did not believe? - This is to be regarded as another objection
of a Jew. “What then? or what follows? if it be admitted that some of the nation did not believe,
does it not follow that the faithfulness of God in his promises will fail?” The points of the
objection are these:
(1) The apostle had maintained that the nation was sinful Rom. 2; that is, that they had not
obeyed or believed God.
(2) This, the objector for the time admits or supposes in relation to some of them. But,
(3) He asks whether this does not involve a consequence which is not admissible, that God is
unfaithful.

Did not the fact that God chose them as his people, and entered into covenant with them,
imply that the Jews should be kept from perdition? It was evidently their belief that all Jews
would be saved, and this belief they grounded on his covenant with their fathers. The doctrine of
the apostle Rom. 2 would seem to imply that in certain respects they were on a level with the
Gentile nations; that if they sinned, they would be treated just like the pagan; and hence, they
asked of what value was the promise of God? Had it not become vain and nugatory?
Make the faith - The word “faith” here evidently means the “faithfulness” or “fidelity of God
to his promises.” Compare Mat_13:23; 2Ti_3:10; Hos_2:20.
Of none effect - Destroy it; or prevent him from fulfilling his promises. The meaning of the
objection is, that the fact supposed, that the Jews would become unfaithful and be lost, would
imply that God had failed to keep his promises to the nation; or that he had made promises
which the result showed he was not able to perform.
CLARKE, “Jew. For what -
0kR[H?, What then, if some did not believe, etc. If some of the
Jewish nation have abused their privileges, and acted contrary to their obligations, shall their
wickedness annul the Promise which God made to Abraham, that he would, by an everlasting
covenant, be a God to him and to his seed after him? Gen_17:7. Shall God, therefore, by
stripping the Jews of their peculiar honor, as you intimate he will, falsify his promise to the
nation, because some of the Jews are bad men?
GILL, “For what if some did not believe?.... It is suggested, that though the Jews enjoyed
such a privilege, some of them did not believe; which is an aggravation of their sin, that they
should have such means of light, knowledge, and faith, such clear and full evidences of things,
and yet be incredulous: though it should be observed that this was the case only of some, not of
all; and must be understood, not of their disbelief of the Scriptures being the word of God, for
these were always received as such by them all, and were constantly read, heard, and attended
to; but either of their disobedience to the commands of God required in the law, or of their
disregard to the promises of God, and prophecies of the Messiah, and of their disbelief in the
Messiah himself when he came; but now this was no objection to the advantage they had of the
Gentiles, since this was not owing to want of evidence in the word of God, but to the darkness
and unbelief of their minds: and,
shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? no, their unbelief could not,
and did not make void the veracity and faithfulness of God in his promises concerning the
Messiah, recorded in the oracles of God, which they had committed to them; for
notwithstanding this, God raised up the Messiah from among them, which is another advantage
the Jews had of, the Gentiles; inasmuch as "of" them, "as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who
is God over all, blessed for evermore",
Rom_9:5, and he sent him to them, to the lost sheep of
the house of Israel, as a prophet and minister; he sent his Gospel to them first, and called out by
it from among them his elect, nor did he take it from them until he had done this: and he took it
away only; until "the fulness of the Gentiles", Rom_11:25, is brought in; and then the Gospel
shall come to them again with power, and "all Israel shall be saved" Rom_11:26.

(taodh 9v4For what if some did not believe? — It is the unbelief of the great body of the
nation which the apostle points at; but as it sufficed for his argument to put the supposition thus
gently, he uses this word “some” to soften prejudice.
shall their unbelief make the faith of God — or, “faithfulness of God.”
of none effect? — “nullify,” “invalidate” it.
gtsFo 9v43.What indeed if some, etc. As before, while regarding the Jews as exulting in the naked sign,
he allowed them no not even a SPARK
of glory; so now, while considering the nature of the sign, he
testifies that its virtue (virtutem efficacy) is not destroyed, no, not even by their inconstancy. As then he
seemed before to have intimated that whatever grace there might have been in the sign of circumcision, it
had wholly vanished through the ingratitude of the Jews, he now, anticipating an objection, again asks what
opinion was to be formed of it. There is here indeed a sort of reticence, as he expresses less than what he
intended to be understood; for he might have truly said that a great part of the nation had renounced the
covenant of God; but as this would have been very grating to the ears of the Jews, he mitigated its severity,
and mentioned only some.
Shall their unbelief, etc. Καταργεῖν is properly to render void and ineffectual; a meaning most suitable to this
passage. For Paul’ inquiry is not so much whether the unbelief of men neutralizes the truth of God, so that it
should not in itself remain firm and constant, but whether it hinders its effect and fulfillment as to men. The
meaning then is, “ most of the Jews are covenant*breakers, is God’ covenant so abrogated by their
perfidiousness that it brings forth no fruit among them? To this he answers, that it cannot be that the truth of
God should lose its stability through man’ wickedness. Though then the greater part had nullified and
trodden under foot God’ covenant, it yet retained its efficacy and manifested its power, not indeed as to all,
but with regard to a few of that nation: and it is then efficacious when the grace or the blessing of the Lord
avails to eternal salvation. But this cannot be, except when the promise is received by faith; for it is in this
way that a mutual covenant is on both sides confirmed. He then means that some ever remained in that
nation, who by CONTINUING to believe in the promise, had not fallen away from the privileges of the
covenant.
PULPIT, “For what if some
( τινες . The expression does net denote whether many or few; it only
avoids assertion of UNIVERSALITY of unbelief (cf. Rom_11:17; 1Co_10:7), though it is implied in the
following verso that, even if it had been universal, the argument would stand) did not believe?
shall their
unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
Alford renders ἠπίστησαν "were unfaithful," taking it in the
sense of being "unfaithful to the covenant, the very condition of which was to walk in the ways of the Lord,
and observe his statutes;" and this on the ground that the apostle is not as yet speaking of faith or the want
of it, but, in accordance with the idea of the preceding chapter, of ἀδίκια
(Rom_3:5) and moral guilt. But the
meaning of words must not be forced to meet the views of interpreters; and we observe
that ἀπιστεῖν
and ἀπιστία are ever elsewhere used in their proper sense to denote want of faith. Still, it is to
be observed that in the passage before us ἀπιστία
in man is opposed to πίστις in God, so as to suggest a
more general sense of ἀπιστία
than mere unbelief. In view of this opposition, we may adopt the rendering of
the whole passage in the Revised Version: "What if some were without faith? Shall their want of faith," etc.?
Meyer and others, understanding (as said above) by λόγια
the Divine oracles which were prophetic of Christ,
refer ἠπίστησαν
exclusively to the disbelief in him on the part of the majority of the Jews at the time of
writing. But the aorist tense of the verb, as well as the context, is against the idea of such reference, at any
rate exclusively. The context, both in Rom_2:1*29. and the latter part of this chapter after Rom_2:9, certainly
suggests rather reference to the failure of the Jews throughout their history to realize the advantage of their
privileged position; and this failure might properly be attributed to their want of faith, to the καρτδία πονηρὰ

ἀπιστίας(Heb_3:12), cf. Heb_3:19; Heb_4:2, together with Rom_4:11. Ἀπιστία in these passages is
regarded as the root of ἀπειθεία
. On the other hand, the whole drift of Rom_11:1*36. in this Epistle—where
the present ἀπιστία
of the chosen people shown in their rejection of the gospel is spoken of as not hindering,
but furthering, the righteous purpose of God, and redounding in the end to his glory—suggests a like
reference here. And it may have been in the apostle's mind, though, for the reasons above given, it can
hardly be the only one in the passage before us.

gktWsedvdoaeh 9v4
THE FOLLY OF UNBELIEF
Rom_3:3*4. What if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God
forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar.
IN every age of the world man has been prone to disbelieve the testimony of God: our first parents fell by
questioning the prohibition which God had given them, and doubting the penalty with which it was enforced.
Their posterity, born in their fallen image, have but too faithfully copied their example. By unbelief, the
antediluvian world were overwhelmed: by unbelief, God’s chosen people the Jews have been despoiled of
all their privileges. The same malignant principle pervades also the Christian church. We profess indeed, like
the Jews of old, to venerate the sacred oracles; but there is scarcely a truth contained in them, which is not
practically, and almost, universally, denied. Yet is this no reason for questioning their divine authority: for
God is as immutable in his word, as he is in his nature; and, as his existence would not be affected, though
the whole world should be atheists, so neither will one jot or tittle of his word fail, though the world should be
infidels. This is the very point on which St. Paul is insisting in the passage before us. Having observed that
the Jews were highly privileged in having the oracles of God committed to them, he anticipates the objection
which might be urged against him from their unbelief; and allowing the truth of the fact, That they were very
generally disbelieved, he denies and refutes the inference that might be drawn from it, by declaring, That
their unbelief, however GENERAL
it might be, could never invalidate the truth of God.
From his words we shall be led to consider,
I. The prevalence of unbelief—
It is not our intention to expose the errors of infidelity, or the sophistry with which the truth of God has been
assailed; but rather to point out that secret unbelief which works in the minds of all, even with respect to the
most acknowledged truths. That such unbelief prevails, cannot possibly be doubted, if we observe,
1. How general is men’s neglect of the word of God—
[The sacred volume lies by us: we have it in our own language, that all may read it; and it is statedly read
and explained to us in public. But how few study it! how few regard it! how few are there who do not give a
decided, yea, an exclusive preference to books of human science, and even to any worthless novel, or
ephemeral compilation! And what is the cause of this? Could they be thus indifferent, if they believed it to be

the word of God; the word of God to them? Would any one manifest such indifference towards a will in which
he was informed that great estates were bequeathed to him? or even towards a map, which would shew him
his way through a trackless desert? How much less then would any disregard the Holy Scriptures, if they
really believed them to be the charter of their privileges, and the only sure directory to heaven! They would
rather ACCOUNT them more precious than gold, and esteem them more than their necessary food
[Note: Psa_119:72. Job_23:12.].]
2. What contempt men discover for the truths they do hear—
[Men hear that there is such a place as heaven, where the saints shall live in everlasting felicity; and such a
place as hell, where the wicked shall lie down in everlasting burnings: yet are they neither allured, nor
alarmed. When the ministers of God insist on these subjects, they are considered only as preaching
“cunningly devised fables.” But could this be the case, if men believed the testimony of God? Do men feel no
emotion at the news of some unexpected benefit arising to them, or some unforeseen calamity impending
over them? Do men treat with contempt a sentence of condemnation, or a notice of reprieve? How then
could men so disregard the things revealed in the Gospel, if they believed them to be the very truths of
God?]
3. How men expect things in direct opposition to the word of God—
[Unconverted men will as confidently expect to go to heaven, as if the word of God were altogether on their
side. The drunkard, the swearer, the sabbath*breaker, the whore*monger, are as persuaded that they shall
never come into condemnation, as if there were not one word in all the book of God that declared the
contrary. They will never believe that the wrath of God is revealed against such sins as theirs,
notwithstanding God so positively declares, that “the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God
[Note: 1Co_6:9.].” They do not indeed imagine that any will be finally lost. They can hear of thousands slain
in battle, and yet extend their thoughts no further than the grave. The idea that multitudes of them may
possibly have died in their sins, and been consigned over to endless misery, seems so harsh, that they
cannot harbour it in their minds one moment, notwithstanding God expressly says, that “the wicked shall be
turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God [Note: Psa_9:17.].” Could all this be so, if they believed
the word of God? Would not their sentiments then be more conformed to it? Would they not be assured,
that, however “it should be well with the righteous,” it must and should “go ill with the wicked [Note: Isa_3:10*
11.]?”]
4. How little men are influenced by the things they profess most to believe—
[They profess to believe that there is a God: yet they do not love him, or fear him, or trust in him, or regard
him, any more than if there were no such Being. They profess to believe that they have an immortal soul; yet
they pay no more attention to its interests, than if it were not to survive the body. They profess to believe that

there will be a day of judgment, wherein they shall give account of themselves to God: yet they are not at all
solicitous to know how their account stands; they bestow no pains in preparing for that day; they presume
that others are happy, and thatthey
shall fare as well as those who have gone before them; and thus they
hazard their eternal welfare on a mere groundless surmise. They profess to believe that death will put a
period to their day of grace, and that it may snatch them away suddenly, and unawares: yet they live as
securely, as if they could call days and years their own: “Soul, take thine ease,” is the constant language of
their hearts. Now, whence is all this? Will any one say, that these men are thoroughly persuaded even of the
things which they profess most to believe? they certainly are not: they give a general assent to them,
because they have been educated in these particular sentiments, and because their reason cannot but
acquiesce in them as true: but as for the faith which realizes invisible things, which is “the substance of
things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen,” they have no portion of it; they are shut up altogether
in unbelief.]
The prevalence of unbelief being thus unquestionably proved, we proceed to point out,
II. The folly of it—
A just view of this subject will soon convince us, that the very men who glory in their unbelief, and say,
“Wisdom shall die with us [Note: Job_12:2.],” are indeed influenced by the most foolish and fatal of all
principles: for, with respect to unbelief,
1. It cannot avert the evils which it affects to despise—
[Unbelief can never make void the truth of God. It did not in the days of old. When Satan said to our first
parents, “Ye shall not surely die,” and they credited his testimony in preference to God’s, did their unbelief
avail them? was the threatening less certain? Did God forbear to inflict it? Did not their souls die that very
day, being instantly separated from God, which constitutes spiritual death, and becoming obnoxious to his
wrath, the chief ingredient of eternal death? Did not their bodies also, though, for the peopling of the earth,
and for other gracious purposes, they were suffered to CONTINUE
awhile, become impregnated with the
seeds of death, whereby they were in due time reduced again to their native dust?
When the unbelieving Jews rejected their Messiah, were the purposes of God at all frustrated? Yea, were
they not rather furthered and accomplished by their unbelief? and were not the whole nation, except a little
remnant, broken off from their stock, and the Gentiles, whom they regarded as accursed, engrafted on it?
So we may now
ask of unbelieving sinners, “What if ye do not believe? shall your unbelief make the faith of
God without effect?” Will God cease to he an holy, sin*hating, sin*avenging God, because ye presume to
think him even such an one as yourselves? Shall sin no longer be debasing, defiling, damning, because ye
choose to esteem it light and venial? Shall death wait your pleasure, because ye think ye have made a

covenant with it, and put it far from you? shall the judgment*day lose its solemnity, and the account you are
to give be made less strict, because you take it for granted, that all shall then be well with you? Shall hell be
divested of its horrors, because you will not believe that there is any such place, or because you are averse
to hear of it? Shall the nature and blessedness of heaven be altogether changed, in order that it
may, ACCORDING to your conceits, be the residence of the wicked as well as of the righteous? In short,
is it reasonable, is it probable, is it possible, that the truth of God should be made void, merely because you
do not choose to believe it?]
2. It enhances and insures the evils, whose very existence it presumes to deny—
[The Apostle tells us what should be the fixed principle of our minds, “Let God be true; but every man a liar.”
But unbelief reverses this; and gives, not only to the testimony of man, but even to his most groundless
conjectures, a greater weight than to the most solemn declarations of Jehovah. What an affront is this to the
Majesty of heaven! Is there a man on earth that would not take offence at such an indignity, especially if it
were offered to him by those whom he had never deceived, and for whose sake alone he had spoken? Let it
not then be thought, that, to treat God as though he had no veracity, is a light matter; for surely it must
greatly provoke the eyes of his glory.
Besides, unbelief, while it thus incenses God against us, rejects the only possible means of reconciliation
with him; and consequently rivets all our guilt upon us — — — Judge then whether they, who yield
themselves up to its influence, be not “blinded by Satan,” and victims to their own delusions
[Note: 2Co_4:4. Isa_66:4.]?]
By way of improvement, let me commend to your attention the grand object of a Christian’s faith—
[It is to little purpose to have general
notions of the prevalence and folly of unbelief, if we do not apply
them particularly
to that fundamental doctrine of Scripture, That we are to be justified solely by faith in the
Lord Jesus. This is that, which is emphatically called, The Gospel; concerning the necessity
of believing
which, nothing more need be urged, than that assertion of our Lord, “He that believeth shall be saved, and
he that believeth not shall be damned
[Note: Mar_16:16.].” The point for us now to determine, is, Do
we indeed
believe in Christ for the justification of our souls? We are CONTINUALLY
apt to mistake the
nature of saving faith; and, for want of right views of that, we put away from ourselves all that is spoken
respecting unbelief, as though we had no experience of it, no concern about it. But it has been already
abundantly shewn, that if we believe only in the manner that the generality of Christians do, we have
no truefaith at all. Examine then, Have you clear and lively views of Christ as the Saviour of sinners? Are
you deeply convinced of your own sinfulness, and your consequent need of mercy? Have you renounced
every other hope? and do you rely simply and solely on Christ’s atonement? Finally, are you deriving virtue
from him for the healing of your corruptions, and for the bringing forth of all the fruits of righteousness to his
praise and glory? This, and this alone, is saving faith; and he, who thus
believes, shall be saved; and he,

who does not thus believe, shall be damned. Let not any object, and say, “What is there in this faith that
should save us, or in the want of it that should condemn us?” Our only inquiry must be, Has God suspended
our salvation on the exercise of a living faith, or not? If he has, we have no more to say, than, “Let God be
true: but every man a liar.” To dispute against him is to dispute against the wind. The wind will not stop its
course for us: yet sooner should that be done, yea, “sooner should heaven and earth pass away, than one
jot or tittle of his word should fail.” If then no objections of our’s can ever disprove the truth of God’s word, or
prevent the execution of it on our own souls, let us guard against that principle of unbelief, which operates
so powerfully, so fatally, within us. Let us remember where our danger lies: it is not in giving too much weight
to the declarations of God: but in softening them down, and accommodating them to our vain wishes or
carnal apprehensions. Let then the fore*mentioned record abide upon our minds. Let us be persuaded that
he, whom God blesses, shall be blessed; and he, whom God curses, shall be cursed. In other words, Let us
rest assured, that life is to BE FOUND in Christ alone; and that “he who hath the Son, hath life; and he
who hath not the Son of God, hath not life [Note: 1Jn_5:11*12.].”]
ifncat Isαf;,sH,JCw;sjvννCswvOwIsρyv:SIsvj,sOp:sw:Ggesting that if some of the Jews did not believe (He is
ready to admit that as a possibility.) that God could forget his promises to all the Jews? Are you saying that
just because some of us didn't measure up to what God required in the Law, everyone in Israel has lost the
promise that God gave them? You seem to suggest that God is not interested in the very rituals which he
himself instituted. Are you saying that circumcision and all these things mean nothing to God? Are you saying
that God is upset by the disbelief of just a few Jews and so he has canceled all Israel's prerogatives?"
Paul's answer uses the strongest words in the GreeksSv.G:vG,sgpswvOsvsg;C.GsCwsdvSw,TsρuOs.psE,v.wδs pt at
all!" (Literally, "May it never be!" Or, as it is translated in some versions, "God forbid!") That would suggest
that God is the failure. It would suggest that God gave a promise and then did not keep his words, just
because a few people failed to measure up. So God would be at fault. Our human hearts always tend to blame
God for what goes wrong in our life, for our inabilCgOsgpsd:SdCSSsJ;vgsmpFsF,Ev.FwTsyv:SswvOwIsρ ,A,jslet that
be! Let God be true, and every man a liar." God is going to keep his word no matter how many fail.
Paul then quotes David's fifty.first psalm, that wonderful psalm written after the twin sins of murder and
adultery, in which he was caught red.handed. When David repented, he wrote this beautiful psalm, in which
he confesses his sins to God,
So that Thou mayest be in the right in Thy words,
And blameless when Thou dost judge. {cf, Psa 51:4b}
For a year and a half, David tried to hide his sins and refused to admit them to God or anyone else. He went
on acting as though he were righteous and let people think that he was still the godly king of Israel. He let that
hypocrisy go on for eighteen months; then God sent vg;v.sg;,sMjpM;,gIsJ;pswM,vj,Fs;CEsJCg;s;CwsSp.GIsbony
finger, and said, "Thou art the man!" {2 Sam 12:7 KJV}. David's sins were exposed; he admitted them and
confessed to God. He said, "It isn't you who are to blame, God; I did it." Paul says, "Let God be true and
every man a liar."
Even if all the Jews fail in their belief, God will still fulfill his promise. How can God do this? God has said
that some will believe. If everybody fails to believe, how can he keep his word? Paul says, "That's your
problem; it's not God's problem." When certain of the Pharisees boasted to Jesus that they were "children of
Abraham," Jesus said, "Don't you understand that God can raise up from these stones children unto
Abraham?" {cf, Matt 3:9, Luke 3:8}. If men fail, God has unlimited resources to fulfill his promise. So there

is no objection at that point. God will still judge the Jews, and all religionists, despite the failure of some. A
third objection is raised in Verse 5 and Paul responds in Verse 6. The Jew asks,
hu,JdjesE <cA: ?::C GW a?gL:M ALC —g:L… DgvmvM:—:? even before the coming of Christ. God had promised by
covenant that they should have those privileges; and they did enjoy them. They had a revelation and a light
divine, while all the world beside sat in heathen darkness. Yet so many Jews did not believe, that, as a whole,
the nation missed the promised blessing. A great multitude of them only saw the outward symbols, and never
understood their spiritual meaning. They lived and died without the blessing promised to their fathers. Did
this make the covenant of God to be void? Did this make the faithfulness of God to be a matter of question?
’sGE lGE’ ?Ly? uLpME ’vW ?GN: CvC lG… V:Mv:m:E LlC so did not gain the blessing, this was their own fault; but
the covenant of God stood fast, and did not change because men were untrue." He remained just as true as
ever; and he will be able to justify all that he has said, and all that he has done, and he will do so even to the
end. When the great drama of human history shall have been played out, the net result will be that the ways
of God shall be vindicated notwithstanding all the unbelief of men.
To put the question in another shape, "For what if some did not believe?" Will God alter his revealed truth?
If some do not believe, will God change the gospel to suit them? Will he seek to please their depraved taste?
Ought we to change our preaching because of "the spvgv… GW …A: L—:’q s:m:gO plM:?? v… V: …G Wv—A… ’…A: spirit of
the age" more desperately that ever. We ask for no terms between Christ and his enemies except these,
unconditional surrender to him. He will bate not jot or tittle of his claims; but he will still come to you, and
say, "Submit yourselves; bow down, and own me King and Lord, and take me to be your Saviour. Look unto
me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and besides me there is none else." If you wait till
there is a revised version of the gospel, you will be lost. If you wait till there is a gospel brought out that will
not cost you so much of giving up sin, or so much of bowing your proud necks, you will wait until you find
yourself in hell. Come, I pray you, come even now, and believe the gospel. It cannot be altered to your taste;
therefore alter yourself so as to meet its requirements.
BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR, “
Man’s unbelief and God’s faithfulness
I. Man’s unbelief; its various forms; impenitence; scepticism.
II. God’s faithfulness; His Word remains true; cannot fail of effect; must be glorified. (J. Lyth,
D. D.)
God justified though man believes not
We have here—
I. A sorrowful reminder. There always have been some who have not believed.
1. This is stated very mildly. The apostle might have said “many” instead of “some.”
Remember that all but two who came out of Egypt fell in the wilderness through unbelief;
but the apostle does not wish to unduly press his argument, or to aggravate his hearers. Even
in his own day he might have said, “The bulk of the Jewish nation has rejected Christ.
Wherever I go, they seek my life, because I preach a dying Saviour’s love.” Yet this is a very
appalling thing, even when stated thus mildly. If all here except one were believers, and it
was announced that that one would be pointed out to the congregation, we should all feel in
a very solemn condition. But there are many more than one here who have not believed. If
the unconverted were not so numerous they would be looked upon with horror and pity. As
they are so numerous, there is all the greater need for our compassion.
2. The terms of Paul’s question suggest a mitigation of the sorrow. “What if some did not
believe?” Then it is implied that some did believe. Glory be to God, there is a numerous
“some.”

3. Yet it is true that, at times, the “some” who did not believe meant the majority. Read the
story of Israel through and you will be saddened to find how again and again they did not
believe, and it may be that, even among hearers of the gospel, the unbelievers preponderate.
4. This unbelief has usually been the case between the great ones of the earth. In our
Saviour’s day they said, “Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on Him?” The
gospel has usually had a free course among the poor, but “not many wise men after the flesh,
not many mighty, not many noble,” are called.
5. Some who have not believed have belonged to the religious and to the teaching class. The
Scribes and Pharisees rejected Christ, although they were the religious leaders of the people.
And now we may be preachers, and yet not preach the gospel of Christ; we may be members
of the Church, and yet not savingly know it.
6. The same may be said if we take the whole range of the nations favoured with the gospel.
7. “What, then, if some do not believe?” Then—
(1) They are lost. “He that believeth not is condemned already.”
(2) There still remains, to those who hear the gospel, the opportunity to believe; and,
believing, they shall find life through the sacred name.
(3) Let us, who do believe, make them the constant subject of our prayers; and bear our
witness to the saving power of the gospel.
II. A horrible inference, viz., that their unbelief had made the faith, or the faithfulness of God,
without effect.
1. Some will say, “If So-and-so and So-and-so do not believe the gospel, then religion is a
failure.” We have read of a great many things being failures. A little while ago it was a
question whether marriage was not a failure. I suppose that, by and by, eating and breathing
will be a failure. The gospel is said to be a failure, because certain gentlemen of professed
culture and knowledge do not believe it. Well, there have been other things that have not
been believed in by very important individuals, and yet they have turned out to be true.
Before the trains ran, the old coachmen and farmers would not believe that an engine could
be made to go on the rails, and to drag carriages behind it. According to the wise men of the
time, everything was to go to the bad, and the engines would blow up the first time they
started with a train. But they did not blow up, and everybody now smiles at what those
learned gentlemen ventured then to say. Look at those who now tell us that the gospel is a
failure. They are in the line of those whose principal object has been to refute all that went
before them. If any of you shall live fifty years, you will see that the philosophy of today will
be a football of contempt for the philosophy of that period. I have to say, with Paul, “What if
some did not believe?” It is no new thing; for there have always been some who rejected the
revelation of God. What then? You and I had better go on believing, and testing for
ourselves, and proving the faithfulness of God. The gospel is no failure, as many of us know.
2. Has God failed to keep His promise to Israel because some Israelites did not believe? Paul
Nays, No. He did bring Israel into the promised land, though all but two that came out of
Egypt died through unbelief in the wilderness. A nation came up from their ashes, and God
kept His covenant with His ancient people; and today He is keeping it. The “chosen seed of
Israel’s race” is “a remnant, weak and small”; but the day is coming when then they shall be
gathered in; then shall also be the fulness of the Gentiles when Israel has come to own her
Lord.
3. Because some do not believe, will God’s promise therefore fail to be kept to those who do
believe? I invite you to come and try. When two of John’s disciples inquired of Jesus where

He dwelt, He said to them, “Come and see.” If any here will try Christ, as I tried Him, they
will not tolerate a doubt. One said that she believed the Bible because she was acquainted
with the Author of it, and you will believe the gospel if you are acquainted with the Saviour
who brings it.
4. Will God be unfaithful to His Son if some do not believe? I thank God that I have no fear
about that. “He shall see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied.” Suppose that you
wickedly say, “We will not have Christ to reign over us.” If you think that you will rob Him of
honour by your rejection, you make a great mistake. If you will not have Him, others will.
This word shall yet become true, “The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of
our Lord and of His Christ,” etc.
5. If some do not believe, will God change the gospel to suit them? Ought we to change our
preaching because of “the spirit of the age”? Never; unless it be to fight “the spirit of the age”
more desperately than ever. We ask for no terms between Christ and His enemies except
these, unconditional surrender to Him. The gospel cannot be altered to your taste; therefore
alter yourself so as to meet its requirements.
III. An indignant reply to this horrible inference.
1. Paul gives a solemn negative: “God forbid!” All the opponents of the gospel cannot move it
by a hair’s breadth; they cannot injure a single stone of this Divine building.
2. He utters a vehement protestation: “Yea, let God be true, but every man a liar.” You know
that if the majority goes in a particular direction, you are apt to say, “It must be so, for
everybody says so.” But what everybody says is not therefore true. If God says one thing, and
every man in the world says another, God is true, and all men are false. God speaks the truth,
and cannot lie. We are to believe God’s truth if nobody else believes it.
3. He uses a Scriptural argument. He quotes what David had said in the Fifty-first Psalm,”
That Thou mightest be justified in Thy sayings, and mightest overcome when Thou art
judged.”
(1) God will be justified in everything that He has said. God shall also be justified when
He judges and condemns men.
(2) A very startling expression is used here: “That Thou mightest overcome when Thou
art judged.” Think of this enormous evil; here are men actually trying to judge the Divine
judgments, and to sit as if they were the god of God. Still the verdict will be in God’s
favour. It would be proved that He had neither said anything untrue, nor done anything
unjust. Conclusion:
1. I want the Lord’s people to be brave about the things of God. There has been too much of
yielding, and apologising, and compromising.
2. If you are opposed to God, I beseech you give up your opposition at once. This battle
cannot end well for you unless you yield yourself to God. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Let God be true, but every man a liar.
God trite
The primary meaning of “truth” in Greek is openness: what is not concealed; but in Hebrew, that
which sustains, which does not fail or disappoint our expectations. The true therefore is—
I. That which is real as opposed to what is fictitious or imaginary. Jehovah is the true God,
because He is really God, while the gods of the heathen are vanity and nothing.

II. That which completely comes up to its idea, or what it purports to be. A true man is a man in
whom the idea of manhood is fully realised. The true God is He in whom is found all that
Godhead imports.
III. That in which the reality corresponds to the manifestation. God is true because He really is
what He declares Himself to be; because He is what He commands us to believe Him to be; and
because all His declarations correspond to what really is.
IV. That which can be depended upon, which does not fail, or change, or disappoint. In this
sense God is true as He is immutable and faithful. His promise cannot fail. His word never
disappoints: it “abideth forever.” (C. Hodge, D. D.)
God’s truth
1. Will survive all human lies.
2. Will be amply justified.
3. Will be triumphantly vindicated. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Standing to what God has said
I admire the spirit of the boy who mentioned something which his mother said. One said, “It is
not so,” and he said, “It is so; my mother said it.” “But,” said the other, “it is not so.” Says he, “If
mother said it, it is so; and if it is not so, it is so if mother said it.” And I will stand to that with
God. If God has said it, it is so, and you shall prove to a demonstration if you like it is not so; but
it is so, and there will I stand. “And be a fool,” says one. Yes, a fool; for such hath He chosen to
seek to do things that make others who do not believe stand aghast: only believe thou, and stand
thou to it, and it shall be impossible for thee, a child of God, to be driven to distrust thy Father.
It ought to be so. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The goodness and wisdom of God’s law unimpeachable
It has ever been held the highest wisdom for a man not merely to submit to necessity—necessity
will make him submit—but to know and believe well that the stern thing which necessity had
ordered was the wisest, the best, the thing wanted there. To cease his frantic pretension of
scanning this great God’s-world in his small fraction of a brain; to know that it had verily,
though deep beyond his soundings, a just law, that the soul of it was good—that his part in it was
to conform to the law of the whole, and in devout silence follow that; not questioning it, obeying
it as unquestionable. (T. Carlyle.)
Ideal standards of duty
The apostle had been showing the Jews that they had utterly failed of becoming truly religious
by means of the old law. And the question arose, “What! was the law, then, good for nothing?”
The law was good, but man was weak; therefore it did not work out that which its interior
spiritual tendency would have wrought out if it had been unchecked. But then God attempted to
do what He was unable to do! If the law was dishonoured in the conduct of the Jews, how should
the Lawgiver retain honour? The tendency of the Jewish objector was to defend himself by

bringing down the character and government of God; and the apostle answered, “Let the justice
and goodness of God remain untarnished, however it may affect men’s reputation.” And the
doctrine which we deduce from this passage is—
I. The tendency of the heart to seek to diminish the intensity of self-condemnation by lowering
the standard of duty. All sense of self-condemnation arises from a comparison of one’s deeds,
character, life and motives, with certain standards of duty. If there had been no law, there could
have been no sense of violating law, and none, therefore, of sin. There is one thing which we
bear less willingly than any other—namely, a sharp sense of shame in self-condemnation. There
is no other feeling that seems to suffocate a man more than to be worried by his own accusing
and condemning conscience. While, then, this feeling is so unbearable, it is scarcely surprising
that men attempt to get rid of it. They pad their conduct, as it were, that the yoke may not bear
so heavily where they feel sore. Therefore, men tell themselves more lies in this direction than in
any other. They deliberately fool themselves—and for the same reason that men take opiates. “It
is not good,” said the physician, “that yon should take opiates to remove that sharp pain. You
had better remove the cause, and so get rid of the pain.” “But,” you say, “I must pursue my
business; and, though it may not be the best thing, give me the opiate.” Men will not, if they can
help it, bear the ache of self-condemnation; and by every means in their power they are
perpetually trying to get rid of it. The ordinary method is to impair that rule of conduct, or that
ideal of light, which condemns them. They attack that which attacks them. Men plead the force
of circumstances for breaking the laws which are most painful to them. They attempt to show
that they are not to blame. They plead that breaking the law is not very sinful. That is, to save
themselves, they destroy the dignity and the importance of the law. Let us trace this tendency.
1. It begins in early life.
(1) A child that will not obey his parents’ injunctions begins, after a while, to find fault
with the rigour by which he is held in check; and as he gets older he finds fault with, and
endeavours to throw off, parental authority. “To be sure,” he says, “I have gone forth at
untimely hours, had my own way in contravention of express authority; but then, I am
not so much to blame. Who could live in a family screwed up as this is? A man must have
some room.” What is all this but an attempt to excuse his own disobedience, by
inveighing against the law under which the obedience takes place?
(2) When the young go forth to the training ground of life, they manifest the same
tendency. The truant and dullard at school turns against the master, and at last against
the school. He declares that it is not his fault. Or, if he admits that it is his fault in part,
he pleads the provocation; and so the rebellious boy at school tarnishes the good
reputation of the teacher, and inveighs against the school.
2. It runs through industrial forms.
(1) If in a trade or profession, a man prefers to sport rather than to work, and is indolent,
and unsteady, when the pressure of blame and condemnation begins to come on him, he
turns instantly to blame everybody and everything but his own self. Or perhaps the plea
is urged that such and such a calling cannot be successfully followed without moral
obliquity. What is this but destroying their reputation for the sake of shielding their
own?
3. It finds its way into social relations. When men defy the public sentiment which expresses
the social conscience of the community, and come under its ban, and begin to smart, they
attack that sentiment. If it be a course of impurity that they have pursued, they charge
sentiment with prudery; if they have been going in ways in which they have left truth far
behind, they charge it with fanaticism. And, more than that, they do not believe there is
anything in the community better than they are.

4. It pervades the pleas by which criminals seek to defend themselves. As men begin to
violate the laws of the community, as they begin to suffer under the loss of reputation, they
seek to excuse themselves from blame, and to fix it upon others. Even when the law cannot
get its hand upon them; or when, getting it upon them, it cannot hold them; and when they
begin to feel that the unwritten law, which no man can escape, the judgment of good men’s
thoughts, the wintry blast of good men’s indignation round about them, and they are called
“sharpers,” and are treated as such, they complain that it is an indignity heaped upon them;
that it is a wrong done to them, and say, “Society is wrongly organised. If it were better
organised, business would be conducted differently, and men would act differently. But how
can you expect that a man will be right when everything is organised on wrong principles?”
5. It manifests itself in men’s arguments on the subject of vice.
(1) Here is a man who says, “I am no more intemperate than anybody else. I am frank
and open. I drink, and show it. Just go behind the door and see what these temperance
men do.” What is this but the plea of a man who, not satisfied with being a drunkard, is
destroying the very ideal of temperance?
(2) Here is a man who has utterly gone from chastity. That is bad enough; but that is not
all. He says, “Impure, am I? Well, I think I have company enough in this world. No one is
pure. It is because they cannot, and not because they will not, that they do not run into
excesses.” Such men stand inveighing against the memory of their very mother, and
whelming the reputation of pure and noble sisters, and a man who has lost respect for
womanhood in actual life may be considered as given over.
(3) There are those who pursue the same course in regard to probity. They are not
themselves truth speakers; neither do they believe that any man does speak the truth. “I
am a swindler,” says one. “But who is not? Every man has his price.” And what does he
do? He destroys the very ideal of honesty by declaring that nobody is honest.
6. It may also be traced in men’s reasonings on the subject of religious truth. Men care very
little what theology teaches, provided it does not come home to them, either as a restraint or
as a criterion of judgment; but when they begin to be made uncomfortable; when for one or
another reason the pulpit is a power, and they find it in the way of their ambition, or gain, or
comfort; when theology begins to stir them up, and sit in judgment on them, then there is a
strong tendency developed in them to find fault with the truth, and to justify themselves by
adopting what they are pleased to call “a more liberal view.” And so men find fault with the
fundamental principles of a moral government. And under such circumstances they go from
church to church to find a more lenient pulpit.
II. The importance of maintaining our ideal of duty in spite of all human imperfections. The
destruction of ideal standards is utterly ruinous to our manhood.
1. What is an ideal? A perception of something higher and better than we have reached,
either in single actions, or in our life and character. Do I need to ask you what your ideal is,
ye that have sought in a thousand ways to reach that very conception? The musician is
charmed with the song that he seems to hear angels sing; but when he attempts to write it
down with his hands he curses the blundering rudeness of material things, by which he
cannot incarnate so spiritual a thing as his thought. The true orator is a man whose
unspoken speech is a thousand times better than his utterance. The true artist is a man who
says, “Oh! if you could see what I saw when I first tried to make this, you would think this
most homely.” This excelsior of every soul; this sense of something finer, and nobler, and
truer, and better—so long as this lasts a man can scarcely go down to the vulgarism. A man
who is satisfied with himself because he is better than his fellow men. You never thought as
well as you ought to think. You never planned as nobly as you ought to plan. You never

executed as well as you ought to execute. Over every production there ought to hover,
perpetually, your blessed ideal, telling you, “Your work is poor—it should be better”; so that
every day you should lift yourself higher and higher, with an everlasting pursuit of hope
which shall only end in perfection when you reach the land beyond.
2. But what if some mephitic gas shall extinguish this candle of God which casts its light
down on our path to guide us, and direct our course up? What if the breath of man, for
whom it was sent, should blow it out, and he be left in darkness to sink down toward the
beast that perishes? Woe be to that man whose ideal has gone out and left him to the vulgar
level of common life without upward motive. And yet, that which our text reveals, and
revealing condemns, is universal—namely, the attempt of men to find fault with law, or with
God, the fountain of law, with the ideal of rectitude, rather than find fault with themselves.
Nay, “Let God be true, but every man a liar.” (H. Ward Beecher.)
A sG… L… LMMD .:… dGC V: …gp:E LlC :m:gy NLl L MvLg. As it is
written: "So that you may be proved right when you speak
and prevail when you judge." [
1]
riJsjhE <God forbid - Greek. Let not this be. The sense is, “let not this by any means be
supposed.” This is the answer of the apostle, showing that no such consequence followed from
his doctrines; and that “if” any such consequence should follow, the doctrine should be at once
abandoned, and that every man, no matter who, should be rather esteemed false than God. The
veracity of God was a great first principle, which was to be held, whatever might be the
consequence. This implies that the apostle believed that the fidelity of God could be maintained
in strict consistency with the fact that any number of the Jews might be found to be unfaithful,
and be cast off. The apostle has not entered into an explanation of this, or shown how it could
be, but it is not difficult to understand how it was. The promise made to Abraham, and the
fathers, was not unconditional and absolute, that all the Jews should be saved. It was implied
that they were to be obedient; and that if they were not, they would be cast off; Gen_18:19.
Though the apostle has not stated it here, yet he has considered it at length in another part of
this Epistle, and showed that it was not only consistent with the original promise that a part of
the Jews should be found unfaithful, and be east off, but that it had actually occurred according
to the prophets; Rom_10:16-21; 11. Thus, the fidelity of God was preserved; at the same time
that it was a matter of fact that no small part of the nation was rejected and lost.
Let God be true - Let God be esteemed true and faithful, whatever consequence may follow.
This was a first principle, and should be now, that God should be believed to be a God of truth,
whatever consequence it might involve. How happy would it be, if all people would regard this as
a fixed principle, a matter not to be questioned in their hearts, or debated about, that God is true
to his word! How much doubt and anxiety would it save professing Christians; and how much
error would it save among sinners! Amidst all the agitations of the world, all conflicts, debates,
and trials, it would be a fixed position where every man might find rest, and which would do
more than all other things to allay the tempests and smooth the agitated waves of human life.
But every man a liar - Though every man and every other opinion should be found to be
false. Of course this included the apostle and his reasoning; and the expression is one of those

which show his magnanimity and greatness of soul. It implies that every opinion which he and
all others held; every doctrine which had been defended; should be at once abandoned, if it
implied that God was false. It was to be assumed as a first principle in all religion and all
reasoning, that if a doctrine implied that God was not faithful, it was of course a false doctrine.
This showed his firm conviction that the doctrine which he advanced was strictly in accordance
with the veracity of the divine promise. What a noble principle is this! How strikingly illustrative
of the humility of true piety, and of the confidence which true piety places in God above all the
deductions of human reason! And if all people were willing to sacrifice their opinions when they
appeared to impinge on the veracity of God; if they started back with instinctive shuddering at
the very supposition of such a lack of fidelity in him; how soon would it put an end to the
boastings of error, to the pride of philosophy, to lofty dictation in religion! No man with this
feeling could be for a moment a universalist; and none could be an infidel.
As it is written - Psa_51:4. To confirm the sentiment which he had just advanced and to
show that it accorded with the spirit of religion as expressed in the Jewish writings, the apostle
appeals to the language of David, uttered in a state of deep penitence for past transgressions. Of
all quotations ever made, this is one of the most beautiful and most happy. David was
overwhelmed with grief; he saw his crime to be awful; he feared the displeasure of God, and
trembled before him. Yet “he held it as a fixed, indisputable principle that” God was right. This
he never once thought of calling in question. He had sinned against God, God only; and he did
not once think of calling in question the fact that God was just altogether in reproving him for
his sin, and in pronouncing against him the sentence of condemnation.
That thou mightest be justified - That thou mightest be regarded as just or right, or, that
it may appear that God is not unjust. This does not mean that David had sinned against God for
the purpose of justifying him, but that he now clearly saw that his sin had been so directly
against him, and so aggravated, that God was right in his sentence of condemnation.
In thy sayings - In what thou hast spoken; that is, in thy sentence of condemnation; in thy
words in relation to this offence. It may help us to understand this, to remember that the psalm
was written immediately after Nathan, at the command of God, had gone to reprove David for
his crime; (see the title of the psalm.) God, by the mouth of Nathan, had expressly condemned
David for his crime. To this expression of condemnation David doubtless refers by the
expression “in thy sayings;” see 2Sa_12:7-13.
And mightest overcome - In the Hebrew, “mightest be pure,” or mightest be esteemed
pure, or just. The word which the Septuagint and the apostle have used, “mightest overcome,” is
sometimes used with reference to litigations or trials in a court of justice. He that was accused
and acquitted, or who was adjudged to be innocent, might be said to overcome, or to gain the
cause. The expression is thus used here. As if there were a trial between David and God, God
would overcome; that is, would be esteemed pure and righteous in his sentence condemning the
crime of David.
When thou art judged - The Hebrew is, “when thou judgest;” that is, in thy judgment
pronounced on this crime. The Greek may also be in the middle voice as well as the passive, and
may correspond, therefore, in meaning precisely with the Hebrew. So the Arabic renders it. The
Syriac renders it, “when they (that is, people) shall judge thee.” The meaning, as expressed by
David, is, that God is to be esteemed right and just in condemning people for their sins, and that
a true penitent, that is, a man placed in the best circumstances to form a proper estimate of God,
will see this, though it should condemn himself. The meaning of the expression in the
connection in which Paul uses it, is, that it is to be held as a fixed, unwavering principle, that
God is right and true, whatever consequences it may involve; whatever doctrine it may
overthrow; or whatever man it may prove to be a liar.

CLARKE, “Apostle. God forbid - ]jR[W;'k0', Let it not be, far from it, by no means. Yea, let
God be true, but every man a liar, etc. We must ever maintain that God is true, and that if, in any
case, his promise appear to fail, it is because the condition on which it was given has not been
complied with; which is the sense of what is written, Psa_51:4 : I acknowledge my sin, and
condemn myself that the truth of thy promise (2Sa_7:15, 2Sa_7:16) to establish my house and
throne for ever, may be vindicated when thou shalt execute that dreadful threatening,
(2Sa_12:10), that the sword shall never depart from my house, which I own I have brought upon
myself by my own iniquity. Should any man say that the promise of God had failed toward him,
let him examine his heart and his ways, and he will find that he has departed out of that way in
which alone God could, consistently with his holiness and truth, fulfill the promise.
GILL, “God forbid, yea, let God be true, but every man a liar,.... Let no such thing ever
enter into the minds of any, that the truth of God can be, or will be made of none effect by the
want of faith in man; let it be always asserted and abode by; that God is true, faithful to his
word, constant in his promises, and will always fulfil his purposes; though "every man is a liar",
vain, fallacious, and inconstant: referring to
Psa_116:11;
as it is written, Psa_51:4;
that thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou
art judged. This is a proof that God is true, and stands to his word, though men are fallacious,
inconstant, and wicked. God made a promise to David, that of the fruit of his body he would set
upon his throne; that the Messiah should spring from him; that he would of his seed raise up
unto Israel a Saviour. Now David sinned greatly in the case of Bathsheba, 2Sa_11:3 (title), but
his sin did not make of no effect the truth and faithfulness of God: though David showed himself
to be a weak sinful man, yet God appeared true and faithful to every word of promise which he
had sworn in truth to him; and therefore when he was brought to a sense of his evil, and at the
same time to observe the invariable truth and faithfulness of God, said, "I acknowledge my
transgression, &c. against thee, thee only have I sinned and done this evil in thy sight",
Psa_51:3, which confession of sin I make, "that thou mightest be justified in thy sayings"; or
"when thou speakest", Psa_51:4, which is all one; that is, that thou mightest appear to be just,
and faithful, and true in all thy promises, in every word that is gone out of thy mouth, which
shall not be recalled and made void, on account of my sins; for though I have sinned, thou
abidest faithful; and this also I declare with shame to myself, and with adoring views of thine
unchangeable truth and goodness: "that thou mightest overcome"; that is, put to silence all such
cavils and charges, as if the faith of God could be made void by the unfaithfulness of men: "when
thou art judged"; when men will be so bold and daring to arraign thy truth and faithfulness, and
contend with thee about them. This now is brought as a full proof, and is a full proof of this
truth, that God is always true to his word, though men fail in theirs, and fall into sin. God kept
his word with David concerning the stability of his kingdom, his successor, and the Messiah that
should spring from him, though he acted a bad part against God. There is some little difference
between these words as they stand in the Hebrew text of Psa_51:4; and as they are cited and
rendered by the apostle, in the last clause of them; in the former it is, "that thou mightest be
clear"; in the latter, "that thou mightest overcome". Now to vindicate the apostle's version, let it
be observed, that the Hebrew word הכז rDVIDpDtrRvaRna4tsGadtneRyrRft((RyrRvaRn,tRG(tysn8RapRfiDGiR
DIrvyIGtrRdy2R,tRVD4tIRa.vRapRvitR}tfDriRfsDvDIVr.R9y2rR(l)Rcy,,y8RGaIGtsIDIVRyIRysV.dtIvR.rtwR,2Rc.R

2COrcrO,WcrWOWmvrAwvωgwjίWdcACWvACgwWBOIIcrj,WIίWACcjWBTW2COrcrOWIgrW1rAc(vrΤj,Wוהנכז,W.COACWvωgwmvFg.W
ACgFlWOrJWcrWOrvACgwWpὐOmgW(m),WdCvjvgωgwWיכזד,W.vωgwmvFgj.WOWςcr(,WACgίWmOjAWCcFWcrAvWOrWgFpAίWJcAmCxW
dCgwgWACgW(ὐvjjWΤpvrWcAWcj,Wחצונ,WCgWACOAWvωgwmvFgjWOWςcr(WIίWdvwJj,WACOAWcj,WIίWJcjpΤAcr(WdcACWCcF,WdCcmCWcjW
OWJcj(wOmgWAvWOWςcr(TW)vWACgWdvwJWcjWΤjgJWcrWACgW)ίwcOmWὐOr(ΤO(gWcrWJoh_16:33TWPvwgvωgw,WACgWjgrjgWcjWACgW
jOFg,WIgWcAWwgrJgwgJWgcACgwWdOίxWMvwWOjWOWFOr,WdCgrWCgWvωgwmvFgjWCcjWOJωgwjOwί,WOrJWmOwwcgjWCcjWpvcrAW
O(OcrjAWCcF,WcjWmὐgOwWvMWCcjWmCOw(gjWOrJWmOωcὐj,WjvWέvJ,WdCgrWCgWvωgwmvFgjWcrWRΤJ(FgrA,WcjWmὐgOwWvMWACgW
cFpΤAOAcvrjWvMWdcmςgJWFgrTW1rvACgwWJcMMgwgrmgWcrWACgWmcAOAcvrWcj,WACOAWdCOAWcrWACgWpjOὐFWcjWwgrJgwgJW
.dCgrWACvΤWRΤJ(gjA.,WcjWIίWACgWOpvjAὐg,W.dCgrWACvΤWOwAWRΤJ(gJ.,WPsa_51:4,WACgWdvwJ,WdCcmCWcjWΤjgJWIίWACgW
9jOὐFcjA,Wךטפשב,WFOίWIgWwgrJgwgJWgcACgwWdOίxWgcACgwW.dCgrWACvΤWRΤJ(gjA.,WOjWOWdvwJWvMWACgWjOFgWMvwFWcjW
wgrJgwgJ,WdCgrW.ACvΤWjpgOςgjA.,WcrWPsa_51:4xWvwW.dCgrWOrίvrgWRΤJ(gjWvMWACgg.,WvwW.dCgrWACvΤWOwAWRΤJ(gJ.lW
OWὐcςgWcrjAOrmgWcjWcrWPsa_46:2xWOrJWjvWcAWcjWwgrJgwgJWIίWACgW)gpAΤO(crA,WOrJWMvὐὐvdgJWIίWACgWOpvjAὐg,WACvΤ(CW
ACgWdvwJWCgWΤjgjWFOίWIgWmvrjcJgwgJWcrWACgWFcJJὐgWωvcmg,WOrJWFOίWCOωgWOrWOmAcωgWjc(rcMcmOAcvrWcrWcAxWOrJW
ACgWpCwOjg,WVόWο7W5πὗόVρ6εὗWρV, may be rendered, "when thou judgest", and then both agree.
Htarih IsαGod forbid — literally, “Let it not be,” that is, “Away with such a thought” - a
favorite expression of our apostle, when he would not only repudiate a supposed consequence of
his doctrine, but express his abhorrence of it. “The Scriptures do not authorize such a use of
God’s name as must have been common among the English translators of the Bible” [Hodge].
yea, let God be — held
true, and every man a liar — that is, even though it should follow from this that every man
is a liar.
when thou art judged — so in Psa_51:4, according to the Septuagint; but in the Hebrew
and in our version, “when thou judgest.” The general sentiment, however, is the same in both -
that we are to vindicate the righteousness of God, at whatever expense to ourselves.
bt?(r Isα4.But let God be true, etc. Whatever may be the opinion of others, I regard this as an argument
taken from the necessary consequence of what is opposed to it, by which Paul invalidates the preceding
objection. For since these two things stand together, yea, necessarily ACCORD
, that God is true and that
man is false, it follows that the truth of God is not nullified by the falsehood of men; for except he did now set
those two things in opposition, the one to the other, he would afterwards have in vain labored to refute what
was absurd, and show how God is just, though he manifests his justice by our unjustice. Hence the meaning
is by no means ambiguous, — that the faithfulness of God is so far from being nullified by the perfidy and
apostasy of men that it thereby becomes more evident. “God, ” he says, “is true, not only because he is
prepared to stand faithfully to his promises, but because he also really fulfills whatever he declares; for he so
speaks, that his command becomes a reality. On the other hand, man is false, not only because he often
violates his pledged faith, but because he naturally seeks falsehood and shuns the truth.”
The first clause contains the primary axiom of all Christian philosophy; the latter is taken from Psa_116:11,
where David confesses that there is nothing certain from man or in man.
Now this is a remarkable passage, and contains a consolation that is much needed; for such is the

perversity of men in rejecting and despising God’ word, that its truth would be often doubted were not this to
come to our minds, that God’ verity depends not on man’ verity. But how does this AGREE with what has
been said previously — that in order to make the divine promise effectual, faith, which receives it, is on the
part of men necessary? for faith stands opposed to falsehood. This seems, indeed, to be a difficult question;
but it may with no great difficulty be answered, and in this way — the Lord, notwithstanding the lies of men,
and though these are hinderances to his truth, does yet find a way for it through a pathless track, that he
may come forth a conqueror, and that is, by correcting in his elect the inbred unbelief of our nature, and by
subjecting to his service those who seem to be unconquerable. It must be added, that the discourse here is
concerning the corruption of nature, and not the grace of God, which is the remedy for that corruption.
That thou mightest be justified, etc. The sense is, So far is it that the truth of God is destroyed by our
falsehood and unfaithfulness, that it thereby shines forth and appears more evident, according to the
testimony of David, who says, that as he was sinner, God was a just and righteous Judge in whatever he
determined respecting him, and that he would overcome all the calumnies of the ungodly who murmured
against his righteousness. By the words of God, David means the judgments which he pronounces upon us;
for the common APPLICATION of these to promises is too strained: and so the particle that, is not so
much final, nor refers to a far*fetched consequence, but implies an inference according to this purport, “ thee
have I sinned; justly then dost thou punish me.” And that Paul has quoted this passage according to the
proper and real meaning of David, is clear from the objection that is immediately added, “ shall the
righteousness of God remain perfect if our iniquity illustrates it?” For in vain, as I have already observed, and
unseasonable has Paul arrested the attention of his readers with this difficulty, except David meant, that
God, in his wonderful providence, elicited from the sins of men a praise to his own righteousness. The
second clause in Hebrew is this, “ that thou mightest be pure in thy judgment;” which expression imports
nothing else but that God in all his judgments is worthy of praise, how much soever the ungodly may clamor
and strive by their complaints disgracefully to efface his glory. But Paul has followed the Greek version,
which answered his purpose here even better. We indeed know that the Apostles in quoting Scripture often
used a freer language than the original; for they counted it enough to quote what was suitable to their
subject: hence they made no great ACCOUNT of words.
The application then of this passage is the following: Since all the sins of mortals must serve to illustrate the
glory of the Lord, and since he is especially glorified by his truth, it follows, that even the falsehood of men
serves to CONFIRM rather than to subvert his truth. Though the word κρίνεσθαι, may be taken actively as
well as passively, yet the Greek translators, I have no doubt, rendered it passively, contrary to the meaning
of the Prophet.
(91)
(91) Whenever there is a material agreement between the Greek and the Hebrew, we ought not to make it
otherwise. If the verb
κρίνεσθαι as admitted by most critics, may be taken actively and be thus made to
agree with the Hebrew, what reason can there be to take it in another sense? The only real difference is in
one word, between
νικήσης “” and הכזת, “ clear:” but the meaning is the same, though the words are
different. To overcome in judgment, and to be clear in judgment, amounts to the same thing. The parallelism
of the Hebrew requires
κρίνεσθαι to be a verb in the middle voice, and to have an active meaning. The two
lines in Hebrew, as it is often the case in Hebrew poetry, contain the same sentiment in different words, the
last line expressing it more definitely; so that to be “” and to be “” convey the same idea; and also “ thy
word,” or saying — ךרבדב and “ thy judgment” ךטפשב. In many copies both these last words are in the plural
number, so that the first would be strictly what is here expressed, “ thy words,” that is, the words which thou
hast declared; and “ thy judgments,” that is, those which thou hast announced, would be fully rendered by “
thou Judgest.”
Commentators, both ancient and modern, have differed on the meaning of the verb in question. [Pareus
]
[Beza ] [Macknight ] and [Stuart ] take it in an active sense; while [Erasmus ] [Grotius] [Venema ] and others,
contend for the passive meaning. [Drusius ] [Hammond ] and [Doddridge ] render it, “ thou contendest in
judgment,” or, “ thou art called to judgment:” and such a meaning no doubt the verb has according
to Mat_5:40, and 1Co_6:1. But in this case regard must be had, especially to the meaning which
corresponds the nearest with the original Hebrew. Some have maintained that “ thy judgment” ךטפשב may

be rendered “ judging thee;” but this would not only be unusual and make the sentence hardly intelligible, but
also destroy the evident parallelism of the two lines. The whole verse may be thus literally rendered from the
Hebrew, —
Against thee, against thee only have I sinned;
And the evil before thine eyes have I done;
So that thou art justified in thy words,
And clear in thy judgments.
The conjunction ןעמל, admits of being rendered so that; see Psa_30:12; Isa_41:20; Amo_2:7; and
ὅπως in
many instances may be thus rendered; see Luk_2:35. It is what [Schleusner
] designates ἐκβατικῶς
signifying the issue or the event.
[Pareus ] connects the passage differently. He considers the former part of the verse parenthetic, or as
specifying what is generally stated in the previous verse, the third; and with that verse he connects this
passage: so that the rendering of the two verses would be the following, —
3.For my transgression I acknowledge, And my sin is before me CONTINUALLY , —
4.(Against thee, against thee only have I sinned, and the evil before thine eyes have I done,) That thou
mightest be justified in thy saying, And clear in thy judgment.
This is certainty more probable than what [Vatablus ] and [Houbigant ] propose, who connect the passage
with the second verse, “ me thoroughly,” etc. But the sense given by [Calvin ] is the most satisfactory — Ed.
PULPIT, “
God forbid
(there is no better English phrase for expressing the indignant repudiation of \ὴ
γένοιτο ): yea, let God be true ( γινέσθω ἀληθὴς ; i.e. "let his truth be established;" "Fiat, in judicio,"
Bengel), but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and
mightest overcome when thou art judged , We can hardly avoid recognizing a reference to Psa_116:11 in
"every man a liar, the words of the LXX. being exactly given, though the general purport of that psalm does
not bear upon the present argument. The apostle takes this phrase from it as expressing well what he wants
to say, viz. that though all men were false (in the sense expressed and implied by the previous ἠπίστησαν
),
yet God's truth stands. But it only leads up to the second quotation from Psa_51:1*19., which is the
important one, introduced by καθὼς γέραπται
. In its final words, νικήσης ἐν τῶ κρίνεσθαί σε , the LXX. is
followed (so also Vulgate,cum judicaris), though the Hebrew may be more correctly rendered, as in the
Authorized Version, "be clear when thou judgest." The κρίνεσθαι of the LXX. may be understood passively in
the sense of God being called to ACCOUNT
, as men might be, for the justice of his dealings; or, perhaps,
in a middle sense for entering into a suit or controversy with his people. Κρίνεσθαιmeans "going to law"
in 1Co_6:1, 1Co_6:6
(cf. also Mat_5:40), and in the LXX., with especial reference to a
supposed controversy or pleading of God with men, Jer_25:31; Job_9:2; Job_13:19. (See
also Hos_2:2, Κρίθητε πρὸς τὴν \ητέρα
ὑῶν .) The meaning of this concluding expression does not,
however, affect the main purport of the verse, or its relevancy as here QUOTED
. Occurring in what is
believed to be David's penitential psalm after his sin. in the matter of Uriah, it declares, in conjunction with
the preceding verse, that, sin having been committed, man alone is guilty, and that God's truth and
righteousness can never be impugned. But it seems to imply still more than this, viz. that man's sin has the
establishment of God's righteousness as its consequence, or even, it may be, as its purpose; for the
conclusion of Job_13:4
in the psalm, naturally connected with "against thee only have I sinned" preceding, is
so connected by ὄπως ἂν(in Hebrew, ðòÇîÇìÀ
); and it is not out of keeping with scriptural doctrine that

David should have intended to express even Divine purpose in that he had been permitted, for his sins, to
fall into that deeper sin with the view of establishing God's righteousness all the more. It does not, however,
seem certain that the conjunction need of necessity be understood as relic; it may beembatic
only. However
this be, it is the inference from ὄπως ἀν
that suggests the new objection of the following verse.
This is quoted from Ps. 51:4, where David says that if God punishes him, it is because God is right. When God
judges us guilty, then it is because we are guilty. He is right and faithful even when he punishes people. His
covenant said he would punish sin, so a threat of punishment on the day of judgment is not a betrayal, but a matter
of faithfulness.
SPURGEON, “Then Paul utters a vehement protestation: "Yea, let God be true, but every man a liar." Can you
picture this great host? Here they come, all the men who ever lived, unnumbered millions! They come marching up;
and we stand like the inspecting general at a review, and see them all go by; and as every man passes, he shouts,
"The gospel is not true. Christ did not die. There is no salvation for believers in him." The apostle Paul, standing as
it were at the saluting-point, and seeing the whole race of mankind go by, says, "God is true, and every one of you is
a liar." "Let God be true, but every man a liar." You know the way that we have of counting beads, and if the
majority goes in a particular direction, we almost go that way. If you count the heads, and there is a general
consensus of opinion, you are apt to say, "It must be so, for everybody says so." But what everybody says is not
therefore true. "Let God be true, but every man a liar." It is a strange, strong expression; but it is non too strong. If
God says one thing, and every man in the world says another, God is true, and all men are false. God speaks the
truth, and cannot lie. God cannot change; his word, like himself, is immutable. We are to believe God's truth if
nobody else believes it. The general consensus of opinion is nothing to a Christian. He believes God's word, and he
thinks more of that than of the universal opinion of men.
Paul next uses a Scriptural argument. Whenever he gets thoroughly redhot, and wants an overwhelming argument,
he always goes to the divine treasury of revelation. He quotes what David had said in the fifty-first Psalm, "That
thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged."
God will be justified in everything that he has said. You may take every line of the Word of God, and rest assured
that God will be justified in having directed the sacred penman to write that line.
God shall also be justified when he judges, and when he condemns men. When he pronounces his final sentence
upon the ungodly, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:" he shall
be justified even in that dreadful hour.
A very startling expression is used here: "That thou mightest overcome when thou art judged." Think of this
enormous evil; here are men actually trying to snatch the balance and the rod from the hand of God; and presuming
to judge his judgments, and to sit as if they were the god of God. Suppose that they could be daring enough to do
even that, the verdict would be in God's favour. It would be proved that he had neither said anything untrue, nor
done anything unjust. We are confident that, although some do not believe God, he will be justified before men and
angels, and we shall have nothing to do but to admire and adore him world without end.
Now, I could say much more; but I will not except just this, I want those who are the Lord's people to be very brave
about the things of God. There has been too much of yielding, and apologizing, and compromising. I cannot bear it;
it grieves me to see one truth after another surrendered to the enemy. A brother writes to me, saying, "You do not put
so much mirth into your preaching as you used to do. When the captain at sea whistles, then all the sailors feel more
cheerful." My friend adds, "Whistle a bit." I will do so. This is my way of whistling to cheer my shipmates. I believe
in the everlasting God, and in his unchanging truth; and I am persuaded that the gospel will win the day, however
long and stern the conflict rages. Therefore, my brethren, be not ashamed of the gospel, nor of Christ your Lord,
who died that he might save you eternally. "Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong." Even if it
did come to this, that every other man in the world were against the truth of God, stand you to his word, and say,
"Let God be true, but every man a liar."
The other word that I have to say is a message to the unsaved. If you are opposed to God, I beseech you give up your
opposition at once. The battle cannot end well for you unless you yield yourself to God. He is your Maker and
Preserver; every argument we can use ought to convince you that you should be on his side. I pray you remember
that, for you to contend with God, is for the gnat to contend with the fire, or the wax, to fight with the flame. You
must be destroyed if you come into collision with him. Then yield to him at once. "Kiss the Son, lest he be angry,
and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little." What is it to kiss the Son? Why, to accept the
Lord Christ as your King and Saviour. To ask him to be your peace and your salvation. Ask him now, before that

clock ceases striking. I pray that some may at this moment say, "I will have Christ, and I will be Christ's." The Lord
grant it! This great transaction done now, it shall be done forever; and you and I will meet on the other side of
Jordan, in the land of the blessed, and eternally praise him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own
blood, and made us kings and priests unto God. The Lord be with you, for Jesu's sake! Amen.
5 But if our unrighteousness brings out God's righteousness
more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in
bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.)
?tW ed5v,But if our unrighteousness - If our sin. The particular sin which had been
specified
Rom_3:3 was “unbelief.” But the apostle here gives the objection a general form. This
is to be regarded as an objection which a Jew might make. The force of it is this:
(1) It had been conceded that some had not believed; that is, had sinned.
(2) But God was true to his promises. Notwithstanding their sin, God’s character was the
same. Nay,
(3) In the very midst of sin, and as one of the results of it, the character of God, as a just
Being, shone out illustriously. The question then was,
(4) If his glory resulted from it; if the effect of all was to show that his character was pure; how
could he punish that sin from which his own glory resulted? And this is a question which is
often asked by sinners.
Commend - Recommend; show forth; render illustrious.
The righteousness of God - His just and holy character. This was the effect on David’s
mind, that he saw more clearly the justice of God in his threatenings against sin, in consequence
of his own transgression. And if this effect followed, if honor was thus done to God, the question
was, how he could consistently punish what tended to promote his own glory?
What shall we say? - What follows? or, what is the inference? This is a mode of speech as if
the objector hesitated about expressing an inference which would seem to follow, but which was
horrible in its character.
Is God unrighteous? - The meaning of this would be better expressed thus: “Is “not” God
unrighteous in punishing? Does it not follow that if God is honored by sin, that it would be
wrong for him to inflict punishment?”
Who taketh vengeance - The meaning of this is simply, “who inflicts punishment.” The
idea of vengeance is not necessarily in the original ^ργήν orgēn. It is commonly rendered
“wrath,” but it often means simply “punishment,” without any reference to the state of the mind
of him who inflicts it, Mat_3:7; Luk_3:7; Luk_21:23; Joh_3:36. Notes, Rom_1:18; Rom_4:15.
I speak as a man - I speak after the manner of human beings. I speak as appears to be the
case to human view; or as would strike the human mind. It does not mean that the language was
such as wicked people were accustomed to use; but that the objector expressed a sentiment
which to human view would seem to follow from what had been said. This I regard as the
language of an objector. It implies a degree of reverence for the character of God, and a seeming

unwillingness to state an objection which seemed to be dishonorable to God, but which
nevertheless pressed itself so strong on the mind as to appear irresistible. No way of stating the
objection could have been more artful or impressive.
CLARKE, “Jew. But if our unrighteousness commend the righteo usness of God -
May we not suppose that our unrighteousness may serve to commend and illustrate the mercy of
God in keeping and fulfilling to us the promise which he made to our forefathers? The more
wicked we are, the more his faithfulness to his ancient promise is to be admired. And if so,
would not God appear unjust in taking vengeance and casting us off?
I speak as a man - I feel for the situation both of myself and my countrymen, and it is
natural for one to speak as I do.
GILL, “But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousnes s of God,.... Hence it
appears, that the unrighteousness of men commends the righteousness, or faithfulness of God;
and yet all unrighteousness is sin; the wrath of God is revealed against it; and would exclude
from heaven, were it not for pardon through the blood of Christ; and besides, the one is contrary
to the other, and of itself, of its own nature, cannot influence and affect the other: wherefore this
can only be understood of the manifestation and illustration of, the righteousness of God by it;
which is covered and commended, in punishing the unrighteousness of men; in setting forth
Christ to be a propitiation for sin; and in fulfilling his promises, notwithstanding the failings of
his people, of which the case of David is a pregnant proof; just as the love of God is illustrated
and commended, by the consideration of the sins of men, for whom Christ died, and his grace
and mercy in the conversion of them: but if this be true,
what shall we say? shall we allow the following question to be put? this answers to
AgEAREAYR
רמימלeRnfiyvRDrRvitstRvaRry2neRasRnvaR,tRryDwmnRyRfy2RapRroty5DIVeRapvtIR.rtwR,2RvitR{y(d.wDrvrR(n)UR
DrR6awR.IsDVivta.reRfiaRvy5tviR4tIVtyIGtDrR6awR.IsDVivta.reRfiaRvy5tviR4tIVtyIGtDrR6awR.IsDVivta.reRfiaRvy5tviR4tIVtyIGtDrR6awR.IsDVivta.reRfiaRvy5tviR4tIVtyIGtmRDpRvitRostdDrtrRystRvs.teRviDrRDrRyR–.rvRGaIrt7.tIGtRapRvitd8R
fitstyrR6awRwatrRvy5tR4tIVtyIGtRaIRdtIRpasRvitDsR.IsDVivta.rItrreR,aviRitstRyIwRitstypvtseRDvRd.rvR,tR
yRoDtGtRapR.IsDVivta.rItrrRDIRiDdRraRvaRwa8RrDIGtRviyvRpasRfiDGiRitRvy5trR4tIVtyIGtRaIRvitdRGaddtIwrR
iDrRafIRsDVivta.rItrr8R,.vRviyvR2a.Rdy2R5IafRyrRft((R,2RfiyvRpa((afreRviyvRviDrRDrRIavRyIRDIptstIGtRapRiDrR
afIeR,.vRyIavitsareRitRywwreR
bRroty5RyrRyRdyIbRroty5RyrRyRdyIbRroty5RyrRyRdyIbRroty5RyrRyRdyI8RhatWe,YWdvX DeRnyGGaswDIVRvaRvitR(yIV.yVtRapRvitRGiD(wstIRapRdtIneRyRoisyrtRapvtIR.rtwR,2R
vitR}tfDriRwaGvasrR(o).R{itRyoarv(tRwDwRIavRroty5RvitRrtIvDdtIvrRapRiDrRafIRdDIweRitRstostrtIvtwRyIavitsR
dyIeRyIwRroa5tRDIRvitR(yIV.yVtRapRyIRyw4tsrys2.R
&אדnןםלbונBut if, etc. — Another objection: “It would appear, then, that the more faithless

we are, so much the more illustrious will the fidelity of God appear; and in that case, for Him to
take vengeance on us for our unfaithfulness would be (to speak as men profanely do)
unrighteousness in God.”
Answer:
gtsFo 9v45But if our unrighteousness, etc. Though this is a digression from the main SUBJECT
, it
was yet necessary for the Apostle to introduce it, lest he should seem to give to the ill*disposed an occasion
to speak evil, which he knew would be readily laid hold on by them. For since they were watching for every
opportunity to defame the gospel, they had, in the testimony of David, what they might have taken for the
purpose of founding a calumny, — “ God seeks nothing else, but to be glorified by men, why does he punish
them, when they offend, since by offending they glorify him? Without cause then surely is he offended, if he
derives the reason of his displeasure from that by which he is glorified.” There is, indeed, no doubt, but that
this was an ordinary, and everywhere a common calumny, as it will presently appear. Hence Paul could not
have covertly passed it by; but that no one should think that he expressed the sentiments of his own mind,
he premises that he assumes the person of the ungodly; and at the same time, he sharply, touches, by a
single expression, on human reason; whose work, as he intimates, is ever to bark against the wisdom of
God; for he says not, “ to the ungodly,” but “ to man,” or as man. And thus indeed it is, for all the mysteries of
God are paradoxes to the flesh: and at the same tine it possesses so much audacity, that it fears not to
oppose them and insolently to assail what it cannot comprehend. We are hence reminded, that if we desire
to become capable of understanding them, we must especially labor to become freed from our own reason,
(proprio sensu ) and to give up ourselves, and unreservedly to SUBMIT to his word. — The
word wrath,taken here for judgment, refers to punishment; as though he said, “ God unjust, who punishes
those sins which set forth his righteousness?”
PULPIT, “But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall We say? Is

God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (so the Authorized Version; rather, brings the wrath upon us ( ὁ
ἐπιφέρων τὴν ὀργήν ), with reference to the Divine wrath against sin, spoken of above). I speak after the
manner of men. God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world! The purport of this reply appears
sufficiently in the paraphrase given above. But the intended Bearing on the argument of Rom_3:7 is not at
once apparent.
dpfWieh 9v4pNOGvC’AbuvNCvNvVuyuv)NyINGvVNIvVMBcHv,u supposed to speak. If ever we are obliged, for the
sake of argument, to ask a question which is almost blasphemous, let us do it very guardedly, and say
something to show that we really do not adopt the language as our own, just as Paul says, "I speak as a man."
If the very sin of man is made to turn to the glory of God, is God unjust in punishing that sin?
dJe!at 9v4tCvpNOGvCNSC9vHcMCvMCvNv)AVVAIvcOVNIvNyBOment. You still hear it today. People say, "If what
we're doing makes God look good because it gives him a chance to show his love and forgiveness, how can he
condemn us? We've made him look good. We've given him a chance to reveal himself, and that's what he
wants. So he can't condemn us for our sins. In fact (as Paul will go on to show the logical conclusion), let's sin
the more and make him look all the better!" People today say, "If God is glorified by human sin and failure,
as the Scriptures say, then let's sin all the more."
Paul's answer is, "Let's carry that out to its logical conclusion. If everyone lived on that basis, then nobody
could be judged and God would be removed as judge of all the world." It would demean God. God would be
no better than the worst of men. God himself could not act as a judge if he actually arranged things so that sin
would glorify God. If God cannot judge, he is demeaned; if he does not judge, the entire world is locked into
perpetual evil. There would be no way of arresting the awful flow of human evil in this world. Therefore, this

is a ridiculous argument.
The fact is, sin never glorifies God. Sin always has evil results; it does not produce good. As the Scriptures say,
"He that sows to the flesh reaps corruption; he that sows to the Spirit reaps life everlasting," {cf, Gal 6:8}.
This is an ordained law of God which no one can break.
1odTtYiKhIOyHA”ig”in_.k_-ijy_.Avi5lqjAijykHyiA_’yiRccasion to encourage themselves in sin. He had said
that the universal guilt and corruption of mankind gave occasion to the manifestation of God's righteousness
lki“yvLvinj.lvA”idRuilAi5_,iIyivLqqyvAy:YipJi_--iRLr sin be so far from overthrowing God's honour that it
commends it, and his ends are secured, so that there is no harm done, is it not unjust for God to punish our
sin and unbelief so severely? If the unrighteousness of the Jews gave occasion to the calling in of the Gentiles,
and so to God's greater glory, why are the Jews so much censured? If our unrighteousness commend the
righteousness of God, what shall we say? v. 5. What inference may be drawn from this? Is God unrighteous,
me adikos ho Theos..Is not God unrighteous (so it may be read, more in the form of an objection), who taketh
vengeance? Unbelieving hearts will gladly take any occasion to quarrel with equity of God's proceedings, and
to condemn him that is most just, Job xxxiv. 17. I speak as a man, that is, I object this as the of carnal hearts;
it is suggested like a man, a vain, foolish, proud creature.
Answer. God forbid; far be it from us to imagine such a thing. Suggestions that reflect dishonour upon God
and his justice and holiness are rather to be startled at than parleyed with. Get thee behind me, Satan; never
entertain such a thought. For then how shall God judge the world? v. 6. The argument is much the same with
that of Abraham (Gen. xviii. 25): Shall not the JudqyiRJi_--iAjyiy_.Aji:Ri.lqjA"idRi:RLIAYijyivj_--”ipf he were
not infinitely just and righteous, he would be unfit to be the judge of all the earth. Shall even he that hateth
right govern? Job xxxiv. 17. Compare v. 18, 19. The sin has never the less of malignity and demerit in it
though God bring glory to himself out of it. It is only accidentally that sin commends God's righteouskyvv”idRi
thanks to the sinner for that, who intends no such thing. The consideration of God's judging the world should
for ever silence all our doubtings of, and reflections upon, his justice and equity. It is not for us to arraign the
proceedings of such an absolute Sovereign. The sentence of the supreme court, whence lies no appeal, is not to
be called in question.
HAWKER 5.12, “But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we
say? God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? I (speak as a man) (6) God forbid: for then how
shall God judge the world? (7) For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto
his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? (8) And not (as we be slanderously reported, and
as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
(NOTE: For
Rom_3:5-8 see end)
But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God
unrighteous who taketh vengeance? I (speak as a man) (6) God forbid: for then how shall God
judge the world? (7) For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory;
why yet am I also judged as a sinner? (8) And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as
some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just. (9) What
then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles,
that they are all under sin; (10) As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: (11) There
is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. (12) They are all gone out of
the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. (13)
Their throat is an open sepulcher; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is
under their lips: (14) Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: (15) Their feet are swift to
shed blood: (16) Destruction and misery are in their ways: (17) And the way of peace have they
not known: (18) There is no fear of God before their eyes. (19) Now we know that what things
soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped,
and all the world may become guilty before God. (20) Therefore by the deeds of the law there
shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
The Apostle having very fully answered every objection, and shewn, by the plainest and most

incontrovertible arguments, that neither Jew nor Gentile could justify themselves before God,
both, being in the Adam-state of nature, of original sin, and actual transgression; he now calls
upon the Church, to consider their situation, under the Gospel dispensation, and demands
whether they thought themselves, as to any external privileges, brought into a better state, so as
to be able to contribute anything towards their own justification before God? To which Paul
answers, both for himself and them, in declaring the contrary. And, as he had before shewn, that
both Jew, and Gentile, were proved to be sinners; so the Church, considered in the Adam-nature
of a fallen state, were equally so before God, And, in confirmation of this, the Apostle quotes at
large, what the Scriptures bad long before delivered, on this momentous point, which brought in
the whole world guilty before God. I earnestly beg the Reader to pause over this subject, and
consider its weighty nature. However humbling, yet it is important to be known. For, in
proportion to the conviction of it on the mind, so will be, more or less, our real regard to the
Lord Jesus Christ, and his salvation. For the words at the end of this paragraph, by the law is the
knowledge of sin: See Rom_7:7 and Commentary.
Rom_3:5-8 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say?
God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? I (speak as a man) (6) God forbid: for then how shall
God judge the world? (7) For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his
glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? (8) And not (as we be slanderously reported, and as
some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God
unrighteous who taketh vengeance? I (speak as a man) (6) God forbid: for then how shall God
judge the world? (7) For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory;
why yet am I also judged as a sinner? (8) And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as
some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
The Apostle foresaw, how ready the carnal, and ungodly, would be, to take offence at this
statement; as if the doctrine led to licentiousness. And moreover, the infidel would go further,
and charge God with unrighteousness, while punishing for sin, in one instance, while in another,
taking occasion from sin, to magnify and display the riches of his grace. But, the Apostle refutes
the unjust charge; and, by the plainest statement shews, that it is but just in God to commend
his righteousness in pardoning his people, because, in the Person of their glorious Head, he hath
received a full equivalent for their transgression. While, on the other hand, God is not
unrighteous, when he takes vengeance on the ungodly, who despise redemption by Christ; for
they stand upon the bottom of self-security, and consequently fall in the day of judgment. And,
ill respect to the false and malicious slander, thrown upon the Lord’s people, as if they should
assert what they totally deny, that they may live as they like; this charge is not so directly leveled
at the Lord’s people, as it is at the Lord himself. It ariseth from the deadly hatred of the Devil,
against Christ, and his people. And therefore, he stirs up the minds of carnal men, to be
indignant against the sovereignty of Jehovah, and against the glorious doctrine of justification
wholly by Christ. It is these precious truths, which are arraigned at man’s bar. It is these things,
which excite, both the bitterest hatred of Satan, and unawakened sinners, But, to raise the hue
and cry against the Lord himself for his dispensations, would be too open and barefaced; and
therefore, the charge is brought forward against the Lord’s people, as if their doctrines led to
licentiousness. Reader! You cannot be a stranger to these things, if you observe what is going on
in the present day, among what is called the religious world; for it is precisely the same as it was
in the days of the Apostle. Indeed it is a blessed proof, and ought to be regarded as such by the
faithful, that the Apostle’s faith and practice were the same then, as the faith and practice of the
present hour, among the true followers of Christ, since they are subject to the same calumny. We
know, and our opposers know, that they who from right principles, profess faith in the sole
justification by Christ, cannot lead lives unsuitable to this precious doctrine. The thing is
impossible. For they art regenerated by God the Holy Ghost, live thereby in union with Christ,

and are followers of God the Father, as dear children. Hence, they may, and they do, challenge
the whole neighborhood where they dwell, whether they are not examples of the believers, in
word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity, 1Ti_4:12. That beautiful Portrait
Paul hath drawn in his Epistle to the Philippians, is the character which every child of God seeks
for grace to copy after, and to form his life by. Finally, Brethren, (said he,) whatsoever things are
true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure,
whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, if there
be any praise, think on these things, Php_4:8.
6 Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the
world?
?tW ed5v,God forbid - Note,
Rom_3:4.
For then - If it be admitted that it would be unjust for God to inflict punishment.
How shall God ... - How will it be right or consistent for him to judge the world.
Judge - To “judge” implies the possibility and the correctness of “condemning” the guilty; for
if it were not right to condemn them, judgment would be a farce. This does not mean that God
would condemn all the world; but that the fact of judging people implied the possibility and
propriety of condemning those who were guilty. It is remarkable that the apostle does not
attempt to explain how it could be that God could take occasion from the sins of people to
promote his glory; nor does he even admit the fact; but he meets directly the objection. To
understand the force of his answer, it must be remembered that it was an admitted fact, a fact
which no one among the Jews would call in question, that God would judge the world. This fact
was fully taught in their own writings, Gen_18:25; Ecc_12:14; Ecc_11:9. It was besides an
admitted point with them that God would condemn the pagan I world; and perhaps the term
“world” here refers particularly to them.
But how could this be if it were not right for God to inflict punishment at all? The inference of
the objector, therefore, could not be true; though the apostle does not tell us how it was
consistent to inflict punishment for offences from which God took occasion to promote his glory.
It may be remarked, however, that God will judge offences, not from what he may do in
overruling them, but from the nature of the crime itself. The question is not, what good God may
bring out of it, but what does the crime itself deserve? what is the character of the offender?
what was his intention? It is not what God may do to overrule the offence when it is committed.
The just punishment of the murderer is to be determined by the Law, and by his own desert; and
not from any reputation for integrity and uprightness which the judge may manifest on his trial;
or from any honor which may accrue to the police for detecting him; or any security which may
result to the commonwealth from his execution; or from any honor which the Law may gain as a
just law by his condemnation. Nor should any of these facts and advantages which may result
from his execution, be pleaded in bar of his condemnation. So it is with the sinner under the
divine administration. It is indeed a truth Psa_76:10 that the wrath of man shall praise God, and
that he will take occasion from people’s wickedness to glorify himself as a just judge and moral
governor; but this will be no ground of acquittal for the sinner.

CLARKE, “Apostle. God forbid - R:W'Vόχὗοχ, by no means. God cannot be unjust; were he
unjust, he could not be qualified to judge the world, nor inflict that punishment on the
unfaithful Jews, to which I refer.
GILL, “God forbid, for then how shall God judge the world?
הלילח,W.MOwWIgWcA.xWjΤmCWOW
rvAcvrWcjWJgAgjAOIὐgWOrJWOIvFcrOIὐg,WrvwWmOrWcAWIgWMOcwὐίWJgJΤmgJWMwvFWdCOAWcjWOjjgwAgJxWMvwWcAWcjWACgW
Τrwc(CAgvΤjrgjjWvMWCcjWvdrWpgvpὐg,WvrWdCvFWCgWAOςgjWrvWωgr(gOrmgWpgwjvrOὐὐί,WOrJWrvAWACgW
Τrwc(CAgvΤjrgjjWvMWvACgwj,WvrWdCvFWCgWJvgjWAOςgWωgr(gOrmg,WdCcmCWmvFFgrJjWCcjWwc(CAgvΤjrgjjxWOrJW
jΤppvjcr(WcAWdOjWACOAWvMWvACgwj,WέvJWmOrrvAWIgWΤrwc(CAgvΤjWcrWpgwMvwFcr(WCcjWACwgOAgrcr(j,WcrWOWdOίWvMW
wc(CAgvΤjrgjjlWFvwgvωgw,WΤrwc(CAgvΤjrgjjWcjWjcr,WOrJWJvgjWrvAWvMWcAjgὐMWIΤAWIίWOmmcJgrA,WcὐὐΤjAwOAgWACgW
wc(CAgvΤjrgjjWvMWέvJxWdCgwgMvwgWέvJWcjWrvAWΤrRΤjAWcrWpΤrcjCcr(WcAxWMvwWCvdWjCvΤὐJWέvJW.RΤJ(gWACgWdvwὐJE.W
dCgwgOjWrvACcr(WcjWFvwgWmgwAOcrWACOrWACOAWCgWdcὐὐWJvWcA,WOrJWACOAWACcjWdcὐὐWIgWJvrgWcrWwc(CAgvΤjrgjjxWdCcmCW
mvΤὐJWrvAWIg,WdOjWCgWΤrwc(CAgvΤjWcrWAOςcr(Wωgr(gOrmgxWdCcmCWdcὐὐWIgWvrgWmvrjcJgwOIὐgWpOwAWvMWACOAW
wc(CAgvΤjWRΤJ(FgrAT
Htarih IsαGod forbid; for then how shall God judge the world? — that is, “Far from
us be such a thought; for that would strike down all future judgment.
bt?(r Isα6.By no means, etc. In CHECKING
this blasphemy he gives not a direct reply to the
objection, but begins with expressing his abhorrence of it, lest the Christian religion should even appear to
include absurdities so great. And this is more weighty than if he adopted a simple denial; for he implies, that
this impious expression deserved to be regarded with horror, and not to be heard. He presently subjoins
what may be called an indirect refutation; for he does not distinctly refute the calumny, but gives only this
reply, — that the objection was absurd. Moreover, he takes an argument from an office which belongs to
God, by which he proves it to be impossible, — God shall judge the world; he cannot then be unjust.
This argument is not derived, so to speak, from the mere power of God, but from his exercised power, which
shines forth in the whole ARRANGEMENT and order of his works; as though he said, — “ is God’ work to
judge the world, that is, to rectify it by his own righteousness, and to reduce to the best order whatever there
is in it out of order: he cannot then determine any thing unjustly.” And he seems to allude to a passage
recorded by Moses, in Gen_18:25, where it is said, that when Abraham prayed God not to deliver Sodom
wholly to destruction, he spoke to this purpose, —
“ is not meet, that thou who art to judge the earth, shouldest destroy the just with the ungodly: for this is not
thy work nor can it be done by thee.”
A similar declaration is FOUND
in Job_34:17, —

“ he who hates judgment exercise power?”
For though there are found among men unjust judges, yet this happens, because they usurp authority
contrary to law and right, or because they are inconsiderately raised to that eminence, or because they
degenerate from themselves. But there is nothing of this kind with regard to God. Since, then, he is by
nature judge, it must be that he is just, for he cannot deny himself. Paul then proves from what is impossible,
that God is absurdly accused of unrighteousness; for to him peculiarly and naturally belongs the work of
justly governing the world. And though what Paul teaches extends to the constant government of God, yet I
allow that it has a special reference to the last judgment; for then only a real restoration of just order will take
place. But if you wish for a direct refutation, by which profane things of this kind may be CHECKED, take
this, and say, “ it comes not through what unrighteousness is, that God’ righteousness becomes more
illustrious, but that our wickedness is so surpassed by God’ goodness, that it is turned to serve an end
different from that to which it tends.”
7 Someone might argue, "If my falsehood enhances God's
truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still
condemned as a sinner?"
puTgs (PκBut if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say?
God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? I (speak as a man) (6) God forbid: for then how shall
God judge the world? (7) For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his
glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? (8) And not (as we be slanderously reported, and as
some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
(NOTE: For
Rom_3:5-8 see end)
But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God
unrighteous who taketh vengeance? I (speak as a man) (6) God forbid: for then how shall God
judge the world? (7) For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory;
why yet am I also judged as a sinner? (8) And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as
some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just. (9) What
then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles,
that they are all under sin; (10) As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: (11) There
is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. (12) They are all gone out of
the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. (13)
Their throat is an open sepulcher; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is
under their lips: (14) Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: (15) Their feet are swift to
shed blood: (16) Destruction and misery are in their ways: (17) And the way of peace have they
not known: (18) There is no fear of God before their eyes. (19) Now we know that what things
soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped,
and all the world may become guilty before God. (20) Therefore by the deeds of the law there
shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

The Apostle having very fully answered every objection, and shewn, by the plainest and most
incontrovertible arguments, that neither Jew nor Gentile could justify themselves before God,
both, being in the Adam-state of nature, of original sin, and actual transgression; he now calls
upon the Church, to consider their situation, under the Gospel dispensation, and demands
whether they thought themselves, as to any external privileges, brought into a better state, so as
to be able to contribute anything towards their own justification before God? To which Paul
answers, both for himself and them, in declaring the contrary. And, as he had before shewn, that
both Jew, and Gentile, were proved to be sinners; so the Church, considered in the Adam-nature
of a fallen state, were equally so before God, And, in confirmation of this, the Apostle quotes at
large, what the Scriptures bad long before delivered, on this momentous point, which brought in
the whole world guilty before God. I earnestly beg the Reader to pause over this subject, and
consider its weighty nature. However humbling, yet it is important to be known. For, in
proportion to the conviction of it on the mind, so will be, more or less, our real regard to the
Lord Jesus Christ, and his salvation. For the words at the end of this paragraph, by the law is the
knowledge of sin: See Rom_7:7 and Commentary.
Rom_3:5-8 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say?
God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? I (speak as a man) (6) God forbid: for then how shall
God judge the world? (7) For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his
glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? (8) And not (as we be slanderously reported, and as
some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God
unrighteous who taketh vengeance? I (speak as a man) (6) God forbid: for then how shall God
judge the world? (7) For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory;
why yet am I also judged as a sinner? (8) And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as
some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
The Apostle foresaw, how ready the carnal, and ungodly, would be, to take offence at this
statement; as if the doctrine led to licentiousness. And moreover, the infidel would go further,
and charge God with unrighteousness, while punishing for sin, in one instance, while in another,
taking occasion from sin, to magnify and display the riches of his grace. But, the Apostle refutes
the unjust charge; and, by the plainest statement shews, that it is but just in God to commend
his righteousness in pardoning his people, because, in the Person of their glorious Head, he hath
received a full equivalent for their transgression. While, on the other hand, God is not
unrighteous, when he takes vengeance on the ungodly, who despise redemption by Christ; for
they stand upon the bottom of self-security, and consequently fall in the day of judgment. And,
ill respect to the false and malicious slander, thrown upon the Lord’s people, as if they should
assert what they totally deny, that they may live as they like; this charge is not so directly leveled
at the Lord’s people, as it is at the Lord himself. It ariseth from the deadly hatred of the Devil,
against Christ, and his people. And therefore, he stirs up the minds of carnal men, to be
indignant against the sovereignty of Jehovah, and against the glorious doctrine of justification
wholly by Christ. It is these precious truths, which are arraigned at man’s bar. It is these things,
which excite, both the bitterest hatred of Satan, and unawakened sinners, But, to raise the hue
and cry against the Lord himself for his dispensations, would be too open and barefaced; and
therefore, the charge is brought forward against the Lord’s people, as if their doctrines led to
licentiousness. Reader! You cannot be a stranger to these things, if you observe what is going on
in the present day, among what is called the religious world; for it is precisely the same as it was
in the days of the Apostle. Indeed it is a blessed proof, and ought to be regarded as such by the
faithful, that the Apostle’s faith and practice were the same then, as the faith and practice of the
present hour, among the true followers of Christ, since they are subject to the same calumny. We
know, and our opposers know, that they who from right principles, profess faith in the sole
justification by Christ, cannot lead lives unsuitable to this precious doctrine. The thing is

impossible. For they art regenerated by God the Holy Ghost, live thereby in union with Christ,
and are followers of God the Father, as dear children. Hence, they may, and they do, challenge
the whole neighborhood where they dwell, whether they are not examples of the believers, in
word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity, 1Ti_4:12. That beautiful Portrait
Paul hath drawn in his Epistle to the Philippians, is the character which every child of God seeks
for grace to copy after, and to form his life by. Finally, Brethren, (said he,) whatsoever things are
true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure,
whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, if there
be any praise, think on these things, Php_4:8.
CLARKE, “Jew. For if the truth of God, etc. - But to resume my reasoning (Rom_3:5): If
the faithfulness of God in keeping his promise made to our fathers is, through our
unfaithfulness, made far more glorious than it otherwise would have been, why should we then
be blamed for that which must redound so much to the honor of God?
GILL, “For if the truth of God,.... The "truth of God" is the same with "the righteousness of
God",
Rom_3:5, and means his faithfulness; of which it is hypothetically said, it
hath more abounded; or has been more illustrated,
through my lie to his glory: nothing is more opposite to truth than a lie; a lie of itself can
never be of any advantage to truth, or to the God of truth; nothing is more contrary to the nature
of God, and more abominable to him; a lie is of the devil, and punishable with eternal death;
wherefore it may seem strange, that the truth of God should abound through it to his glory: now
let it be observed, that the apostle is not speaking of himself, nor of his lie of unbelief, in his
state of unregeneracy; but in the person of a sinful man, "for every man is a liar", Rom_3:4, as
he says, "I speak as a man", Rom_3:5; representing a wicked man, who from what was before
said, might collect this as the sense of it, that the truth of God is illustrated by the lies of men:
and so much may be owned as the apostle's sense, that the truth of God is commended,
illustrated, and made to abound, when it is asserted, that he is true and faithful, and every man
is a liar, fallacious, and deceitful; "let God be true, and every man a liar", Rom_3:4, moreover,
the truth of God may be allowed to abound through the lies of men, in a comparative sense, the
one being set against the other; and so as contraries do, illustrate each other: this may be
assented to, as that sometimes a lie has been overruled by God, for the accomplishing of his
purposes and promises, in which his truth and faithfulness have been displayed, as in the cases
of Jacob and the Egyptian midwives; but then this does not arise from its nature and tendency,
but from the overruling wisdom and providence of God, and therefore not to be excused hereby
from sin; and consequently the inference from it is not just, that therefore "no man can, or ought
to be, judged as a sinner"; since his sin turns to such account, as to make for the glory of God,
which is intimated in the question:
why yet am I also judged as a sinner? if this be the case, I ought not to be reckoned a
sinner, or to be treated as such here, or judged and condemned as one hereafter, which is a most
wicked, as well as weak consequence; for though God is true and faithful to his promises,
notwithstanding the sins of his people, which are as a foil, to set off the lustre of his truth the
more, yet their sins are nevertheless sins, and are taken notice of by him as such, and they are
corrected for them; and however God may overrule, in a providential way, the sins of others for

his glory, this is no excuse for their sins, nor will it be an exemption of them from punishment.
This is the sense of the passage; unless by "the truth of God" should be meant, the Gospel, the
word of truth, which is of God; and which through the apostle's "lie", as the Jews might call his
ministration of it, "abounded to" the "glory" of God; being spread far and near, and made useful
for the conversion of sinners, for turning men from darkness to light, and from the power of
Satan unto God; and for the planting of churches in the Gentile world, as well as in Judea; which
much conduced to the honour of God, and the interest of true religion: and then the meaning of
the last clause is, "why yet am I also judged as a sinner?" why am I accounted and condemned as
an heretic? as an apostate from the faith? as he was by the Jews, and who are used to call
heretics sinners: so "the sinner" in Ecc_7:26 is thus interpreted (p), Whe4ewJWv t ITMHyHWSCHWTMHW
MHCHT!iyIfWSoRWHXyHmMHCHW!TW(q)W!yWN9yHC5HRuWTMSTWiNoiHCo!oFWTMHWMHCHT!iyW!TW!yWyS!RuWPro_10:7uWITMHWoSDHWN’W
TMHWm!i7HRWyMSXXWCNTIfWSoRWbW5HCUWDYiMWyYyAHiTWTM!yWTNW9HWTMHWyHoyHWN’WTMHWmNCRW!oWJoh_9:24uWImHW7oNmWTMSTW
TM!yWDSoW!yWSWy!ooHCICWSoWMHCHT!iuWSWDSoWN’W9SRWAC!oi!AXHyCWSoRW!oWJoh_9:31CWIoNmWmHW7oNmWTMSTWENRW
MHSCHTMWoNTWy!ooHCyICWDHoWN’WiNCCYATWD!oRyCWy!oiHWTM!yWiMSCSiTHCWyTSoRyWNAANyHRWTNWSWmNCyM!AAHCWN’WTMHW
ENRWN’WbyCSHX8W
(taodh 9v4For if the truth of God, etc. — A further illustration of the same sentiment:
that is, “Such reasoning amounts to this - which indeed we who preach salvation by free grace
are slanderously accused of teaching - that the more evil we do, the more glory will redound to
God; a damnable principle.” (Thus the apostle, instead of refuting this principle, thinks it
enough to hold it up to execration, as one that shocks the moral sense).
On this brief section, Note
(1) Mark the place here assigned to the Scriptures. In answer to the question, “What
advantage hath the Jew?” or, “What profit is there of circumcision?” (
Rom_3:1) those holding
Romish views would undoubtedly have laid the stress upon the priesthood, as the glory of the
Jewish economy. But in the apostle’s esteem, “the oracles of God” were the jewel of the ancient
Church (Rom_3:1, Rom_3:2).
(2) God’s eternal purposes and man’s free agency, as also the doctrine of salvation by grace
and the unchanging obligations of God’s law, have ever been subjected to the charge of
inconsistency by those who will bow to no truth which their own reason cannot fathom. But
amidst all the clouds and darkness which in this present state envelop the divine administration
and many of the truths of the Bible, such broad and deep principles as are here laid down, and
which shine in their own luster, will be found the sheet-anchor of our faith. “Let God be true,
and every man a liar” (Rom_3:4); and as many advocates of salvation by grace as say, “Let us do
evil that good may come,” “their damnation is just” (Rom_3:8).
gtsFo 9v47.If indeed (92) the truth of God, etc. This objection, I have no doubt, is adduced in the person
of the ungodly; for it is a sort of an explanation of the former verse, and would have been connected with it,
had not the Apostle, moved with indignation, broken off the sentence in the middle. The meaning of the
objection is — “ by our unfaithfulness the truth of God becomes more conspicuous, and in a
manner CONFIRMED , and hence more glory redounds to him, it is by no means just, that he, who serves
to display God’ glory, should be punished as a sinner.”
(93)

(92) Or, “ if” — Si enim — εἰ γὰρ The particle γὰρ here gives no reason, but is to be viewed as
meaning then, or indeed, verily; see Luk_12:58; Joh_9:30; Act_16:37; Phi_2:27
[Stuart
] renders it, still, and
says, that it “ to a CONNECTION with verse. 5, and denotes a CONTINUANCE of the same theme.”
[Macknight ] often renders it by further, besides, and no doubt rightly. —Ed.
(93)
It is remarkable how the Apostle changes his words from the third verse to the end of this, while the
same things are essentially meant. His style is throughout Hebraistic. [Stuart
] makes these just remarks ,
“Αδικία is here [Rom_3:5
] the generic appellation of sin, for which a specific name , ἀπιστία
was EMPLOYED
in Rom_3:3, and ψεῦσ\α in Rom_3:7. In like manner theδικαιοσύνη in Rom_3:5, which
is a generic appellation, is expressed by a specific one
, πίστιν in Rom_3:3, and by ἀλήθεια in Rom_3:7. The
idea is substantially the same, which is designated by these respectively corresponding
appellations. Fidelity, uprightness, integrity, are designated by
πίστιν δικαιοσύνην and ἀλήθεια while ἀλήθεια
and ἀπιστία ἀδικία designateunfaithfulness, want of uprightness and false dealing. All of these terms have
more or less reference to the תירב, covenant or compact (so to speak) which existed between God and his
ancient people.” — Ed.

PULPIT, “
For if the truth of God in my lie abounded to his glory, why am I also still

judged as a sinner? One view is that this is a CONTINUATION
of Rom_3:5 on the part of the Jew, its drift being the same. But the word κἀγὼ , as well as the position of the
verse after τῶς κρινεῖ
, etc., suggests rather its being intended to express that any one throughout the world,
as well as the Jew, might plead against' deserved judgment, if the Jew's supposed plea were VALID
. Nay,
in that case, the apostle goes on to say, he, or any of us, might justify all wrongdoing for a supposed good
end. Why not?
dpfWieh 9v4omviADvcNCvuTuIvHOyIuDvHcuvA’’ACMHMAIvAm evil men to the establishment of his truth, as he has
often done; why, then, are men punished for it? These are deep, dark questions, which come out of the proud
heart of man, and Paul ventures to answer them.
dJe!at 9v4JcuvHuPHvNDDCvHcuvRAyDC9vdAVuAIuvVMBcHvNygue, and that does not belong here. If your text does
not add this, it is more accurate.
Paul is saying that he includes himself in the circle of condemnation. He says, "If my falsehood..." If you look
back in Romans you can see how he has narrowed this circle:
In Chapter 1 he talks about what "they" do; "They are without excuse." Chapter 2 comes down to "You O
man, who judges another, you are without excuse." Then in Chapter 3 it is "our unrighteousness," and
finally, "my falsehood."
I love this because it means that Paul does not consider himself, even as a believer, beyond the judgment of
God; he is just as capable of falsehood as anyone else. When that happens, that area of his life is subject to the
condemnation of God, the same as anyone else. Paul does not hold himself up as better than anyone else.
Paul says, "Let's go on to say the logical thing: Let's do evil that good may come." What a ridiculous
argument, he concludes. Why, that removes all differences between good and evil. This is what people are
saying today. "There's no such thing as good or evil. Whatever you like is good; whatever you don't like,
that's evil. It's only in your mind that there's any difference between good and evil." You see how up.to.date
this argument is? Paul says it is ridiculous. The logical conclusion to that thinking is moral chaos and
NINy)cS8v A,ADSv)AOGDv2ODBuvNISHcMIB8v;uvCMV’GSvRAOld plunge into a tremendous abyss of immorality in
which anybody could do anything, and nobody would dare to raise a hand in opposition. This would produce
moral anarchy. So, Paul says, the condemnation of this kind of reasoning is well.deserved.

Re W-5v,hL8i)M(vx(v.fivs3uHiuv3L8i)Mc3IvcmvuiTi4MiC and prosecuted (v. 7, 8), for proud hearts will hardly be
beaten out of their refuge of lies, but will hold fast the deceit. But his setting off the objection in its own
colours is sufficient to answer it: If the truth of God has more abounded through my lie. He supposes the
sophisters to follow their objection thus: "If my lie, that is, my sin" (for there is something of a lie in every
sin, especially in the sins of professors) "have occasioned the glorifying of God's truth and faithfulness, why
should I be judged and condemned as a sinner, and not rather thence take encouragement to go on in my sin,
that grace may abound?" an inference which at first sight appears too black to be argued, and fit to be cast
out with abhorrence. Daring sinners take occasion to boast in mischief, because the goodness of God endures
continually, Ps. lii. 1. Let us do evil that good may come is oftener in the heart than in the mouth of sinners, so
justifying themselves in their wicked ways. Mentioning this wicked thought, he observes, in a parenthesis,
that there were those who charged such doctrines as this upon Paul and his fellow.ministers: Some affirm
that we say so. It is no new thing for the best of God's people and ministers to be charged with holding and
teaching such things as they do most detest and abhor; and it is not to be thought strange, when our Master
himself was said to be in league with Beelzebub. Many have been reproached as if they had said that the
contrary of which they maintain: it is an old artifice of Satan thus to cast dirt upon Christ's ministers,
Fortiter calumniari, aliquid adhærebit..Lay slander thickly on, for some will be sure to stick. The best men
and the best truths are subject to slander. Bishop Sanderson makes a further remark upon this, as we are
slanderously reported..blasphemoumetha. Blasphemy in scripture usually signifies the highest degree of
slander, speaking ill of God. The slander of a minister and his regular doctrine is a more than ordinary
slander, it is a kind of blasphemy, not for his person's sake, but for his calling's sake and his work's sake, 1
Thess. v. 13.
Answer. He says no more by way of confutation but that, whatever they themselves may argue, the
damnation of those is just. Some understand it of the slanderers; God will justly condemn those who unjustly
condemn his truth. Or, rather, it is to be applied to those who embolden themselves in sin under a pretence of
God's getting glory to himself out of it. Those who deliberately do evil that good may come of it will be so far
from escaping, under the shelter of that excuse, that it will rather justify their damnation, and render them
the more inexcusable; for sinning upon such a surmise, and in such a confidence, argues a great deal both of
the wit and of the will in the sin..a wicked will deliberately to choose the evil, and a wicked wit to palliate it
with the pretence of good arising from it. Therefore their damnation is just; and, whatever excuses of this
kind they may now please themselves with, they will none of them stand good in the great day, but God will be
justified in his proceedings, and all flesh, even the proud flesh that now lifts up itself against him, shall be
silent before him. Some think Paul herein refers to the approaching ruin of the Jewish church and nation,
which their obstinacy and self.justification in their unbelief hastened upon them apace.
8 Why not say..as we are being slanderously reported as
saying and as some claim that we say.."Let us do evil that
good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved.
?tW ed5v,And not rather - This is the answer of the apostle. He meets the objection by
showing its tendency if carried out, and if it were made a principle of conduct. The meaning is,
“If the glory of God is to be promoted by sin, and if a man is not therefore to be condemned, or
held guilty for it; if this fact absolves man from crime, “why not carry the doctrine out, and make
it a principle of conduct, and do all the evil we can, in order to promote his glory.” This was the
fair consequence of the objection. And yet this was a result so shocking and monstrous, that all
that was necessary in order to answer the objection was merely to state this consequence. Every

man’s moral feelings would revolt at the doctrine; everyman would know that it could not be
true; and every man, therefore, could see that the objection was not valid.
As we - This refers, doubtless, to the apostles, and to Christians generally. It is
unquestionable, that this accusation was often brought against them.
Slanderously reported - Greek, As we are “blasphemed.” This is the legitimate and proper
use of the word “blaspheme,” to speak of one in a reproachful and calumnious manner.
As some affirm ... - Doubtless Jews. Why they should affirm this, is not known. It was
doubtless, however, some perversion of the doctrines that the apostles preached. The doctrines
which were thus misrepresented and abused, were probably these: the apostles taught that the
sins of people were the occasion of promoting God’s glory in the plan of salvation. That “where
sin abounded, grace did much more abound;” Rom_5:20. That God, in the salvation of people,
would be glorified just in proportion to the depth and pollution of the guilt which was forgiven.
This was true; but how easy was it to misrepresent this as teaching that people ought to sin in
order to promote God’s glory! and instead of stating it as an inference which they drew from the
doctrine, to state it as what the apostles actually taught. This is the common mode in which
charges are brought against others. People draw an inference themselves, or suppose that the
doctrine leads to such an inference, and then charge it on others as what they actually hold and
teach. There is one maxim which should never be departed from: “That a man is not to be held
responsible for the inferences which we may draw from his doctrine; and that he is never to be
represented as holding and teaching what we suppose follows from his doctrine.” He is
answerable only for what he avows.
Let us do evil - That is, since sin is to promote the glory of God, let us commit as much as
possible.
That good may come - That God may take occasion by it to promote his glory.
Whose damnation is just - Whose “condemnation;” see the note at Rom_14:23. This does
not necessarily refer to future punishment, but it means that the conduct of those who thus
slanderously perverted the doctrines of the Christian religion, and accused the apostles of
teaching this doctrine, was deserving of condemnation or punishment. Thus, he expressly
disavows, in strong language, the doctrine charged on Christians. Thus, he silences the
objection. And thus he teaches, as a great fundamental law, “that evil is not to be done that good
may come.” This is a universal rule. And this is in no case to be departed from. Whatever is evil
is not to be done under any pretence. Any imaginable good which we may think will result from
it; any advantage to ourselves or to our cause; or any glory which we may think may result to
God, will not sanction or justify the deed. Strict, uncompromising integrity and honesty is to be
the maxim of our lives; and in such a life only can we hope for success, or for the blessing of
God.
CLARKE, “Apostle. And not rather, etc. - And why do you not say, seeing you assume this
ground, that in all cases we should do wickedly, because God, by freely pardoning, can so glorify
his own grace? This is a most impious sentiment, but it follows from your reasoning; it has,
indeed, been most injuriously laid to the charge of us apostles, who preach the doctrine of free
pardon, through faith, without the merit of works; but this is so manifest a perversion of the
truth that a just punishment may be expected to fall on the propagators of such a slander.
GILL, “And not rather, as we be slanderously reported,.... These are the apostle's own

words, in answer to the objector he represented; and it is as if he should say, why do not you go
on? why do you stop here? "and not rather" say, as we are evil spoken of, and our doctrine is
blasphemed:
and as some affirm; ignorantly and audaciously enough:
that we say; and teach:
let us do evil that good may come; a slander cast upon the apostle's doctrine of
unconditional election, free justification, and of God's overruling the sins of men for good; and is
the same which is cast on ours now, and is no small proof of the likeness and sameness of
doctrines:
whose damnation is just; whose judgment would have been right, and their censure of our
doctrines just, had it been true that we held such a principle, taught such a doctrine, or
encouraged such a practice: or their condemnation is just, for aspersing our principles and
practices in so vile a manner; and all such persons are deserving of damnation, who teach such
things, or practise after this sort.
gtsFo 9v48.And not, etc. This is an elliptical sentence, in which a word is to be understood. It will be
complete, if you read it thus, — “ why is it not rather said, (as we are reproached, etc.) that we are to do
evils, that good things may come?” But the Apostle deigns not to answer the slander; which yet we
may CHECK
by the most solid reason. The pretense, indeed, is this, — “ God is by our iniquity glorified,
and if nothing can be done by man in this life more befitting than to promote the glory of God, then let us sin
to advance his glory!” Now the answer to this is evident, — “ evil cannot of itself produce anything but evil;
and that God’ glory is through our sin illustrated, is not the work of man, but the work of God; who, as a
wonderful worker, knows how to overcome our wickedness, and to convert it to another end, so as to turn it
contrary to what we intend, to the promotion of his own glory.” God has prescribed to us the way, by which
he would have himself to be glorified by us, even by true piety, which consists in obedience to his word. He
who leaps over this boundary, strives not to honor God, but to dishonor him. That it turns out otherwise, is to
be ascribed to the Providence of God, and not to the wickedness of man; through which it comes not, that
the majesty of God is not injured, nay, wholly overthrown
(94)
(As we are reproached,) etc. Since Paul speaks so reverently of the secret judgments of God, it is a wonder
that his enemies should have fallen into such wantonness as to calumniate him: but there has never been so
much reverence and seriousness displayed by God’ servants as to be sufficient to CHECK
impure and
virulent tongues. It is not then a new thing, that adversaries at this day load with so many false accusations,
and render odious our doctrine, which we ourselves know to be the pure gospel of Christ, and all the angels,
as well as the faithful, are our witnesses. Nothing can be imagined more monstrous than what we read here
was laid to the charge of Paul, to the end, that his preaching might be rendered hateful to the inexperienced.
Let us then bear this evil, when the ungodly abuse the truth which we preach by their calumnies: nor let us
cease, on this account, constantly to defend the genuine confession of it, inasmuch as it has sufficient power
to crush and to dissipate their falsehoods. Let us, at the same time, ACCORDING to the Apostle’
example, oppose, as much as we can, all malicious subtilties, (technis
— crafts, wiles,) that the base and
the abandoned may not, without some check, speak evil of our Creator.
Whose judgment is just. Some take this in an active sense, as signifying that Paul so far assents to them,
that what they objected was absurd, in order that the doctrine of the gospel might not be thought to be
connected with such paradoxes: but I approve more of the passive meaning; for it would not have been
suitable simply to express an approval of such a wickedness, which, on the contrary, deserved to be
severely condemned; and this is what Paul seems to me to have done. And their perverseness was, on
two ACCOUNTS
, to be condemned, — first, because this impiety had gained the assent of their minds;

and secondly, because, in traducing the gospel, they dared to draw from it their calumny.
(94)
[Grotius
] thinks, that in the beginning of this verse there is a transposition, and that ὅτι after the
parenthesis, ought to be construed before
\ὴ which precedes it, and that ὅτι is for curwhy, — as
in Mar_9:11. The version would then be, “ why not, (as we are reproached, and as some declare that we
say,) Let us do evil that good may come?” This is the rendering of [Luther
] But [Limborch ] and [Stuart ]
consider
λεγω\εν to be understood after \ὴ and the latter takes \ὴ not as a negative but an interrogative, “
shall we say,” etc.? Amidst these varieties, the main drift of the passage remains the same. — Ed.
Htarih Isαtsd:jg;,jsCSS:wgjvgCp.spdsg;,swvE,sw,.gCEent: that is, "Such reasoning amounts to this..which
indeed we who preach salvation by free grace are slanderously accused of teaching..that the more evil we do,
the more glory will redound to God; a damnable principle." (Thus the apostle, instead of refuting this
principle, thinks it enough to hold it up to execration, as one that shocks the moral sense)
iylWmnh IsαV,s.,A,jswvCFIsJ,s.,A,js,A,.sg;p:G;gIsg;at we might do evil that good should come; nay, if all
the good in the world could come of a single evil action, we have no right to do it. We must never do evil with
the hope of advancing God's cause. If God chooses to turn evil into good, as he often does, that is no reason
why we should do evil; and it is no justification of sin. The murder of Christ at Calvary has brought the
greatest possible benefit to us; yet it was a high crime against God, the greatest of all crimes, when man
turned deicides, and slew the Son of God.
9 What shall we conclude then? Are we any better [
2Rπs pgs
at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and
Gentiles alike are all under sin.
utW niIsαWhat then? - This is another remark supposed to be made by a Jewish objector.
“What follows? or are we to infer that we are better than others?
Are we better than they? - Are we Jews better than the Gentiles? Or rather, have we any
preference, or advantage as to character and prospects, over the Gentiles? These questions refer
only to the great point in debate, to wit, about justification before God. The apostle had admitted
Rom_3:2 that the Jews had important advantages in some respects, but he now affirms that
those advantages did not make a difference between them and the Gentiles about justification.
No, in no wise - Not at all. That is, the Jews have no preference or advantage over the
Gentiles in regard to the subject of justification before God. They have failed to keep the Law;
they are sinners; and if they are justified, it must be in the same way as the rest of the world.
We have before proved ... - Rom_1:21-32; 2.
Under sin - Sinners. Under the power and dominion of sin.
CLARKE, “Jew. What then? - After all, have not we Jews a better claim to the privileges of

the kingdom of God than the Gentiles have?
Apostle. No, in no wise - For I have already proved that both Jews and Gentiles are under
the guilt of sin; that they are equally unworthy of the blessings of the Messiah’s kingdom; and
that they must both, equally, owe their salvation to the mere mercy of God. From this, to the end
of the 26th verse, the apostle proceeds to prove his assertion, that both Jews and Gentiles were
all under sin; and, that he might enforce the conviction upon the heart of the Jew, he quotes his
own Scriptures, which he acknowledged had been given by the inspiration of God, and
consequently true.
GILL, “What then? are we better than they?.... The apostle returns to what he was
treating of in the beginning of the chapter, and suggests, that though the Jew has the advantage
of the Gentile, with respect to some external privileges, yet not with regard to their state and
condition God-ward, and as in his sight; "are we
Jews better than they Gentiles?"
no, in no wise; upon no consideration whatever, neither as men, nor as Jews; which is directly
opposite to a notion that people have of themselves:
"in mankind (they say (r)) there are high degrees, one higher than another, and the Israelites
. Je.si—.w&—.lw@—weRnystRy,a4tRy((RdyI5DIwn8Rvit2RystRvitRityweRyIwRvitRIyvDaIrRapRvitRfas(wRystRvitRvyD(eR
yIwRystR(D5tRvaRyRrtsotIveRpasRvit2RGadtRpsadRvitRpD(viRapRvitRa(wRrtsotIv.aaR
’VyDIeRvit2Rry2R(s)eR
nfasvi2RystRvitRbrsyt(DvtreRpasRvitRia(2R,(trrtwR6awRiyviRVD4tIRvaRvitdRia(2Rra.(reRpsadRyIRia(2Ro(yGteR
ny,a4tRy((RvitRstrvRapRvitRotao(tneRviyvRvit2Rdy2RwaRvitRGaddyIwdtIvreRyIwRwt(DVivRDIRvitR(yf.aaR
’IwRt(rtfitstR(t)RDvRDrRa,rts4twRaIRviartRfaswreRGen_1:24eRnvitR(D4DIVRGstyv.stneRasRnvitRra.(RapRvitR(D4DIV.
Gstyv.stneR,2Rc.R’,yUR
nvitrtRystRvitRbrsyt(DvtreRpasRvit2RystRvitRGiD(wstIRapRvitRia(2R,(trrtwR6aweRyIwRvitDsRia(2Rra.(rRGadtRpsadR
iDd8RvitRra.(rRapRvitRstrvRapRvitRotao(teRpsadRfiyvRo(yGtRystRvit2mRry2rRc.RB(tyfyseRpsadRvitRrDwtRapRvitR
(tpvRiyIweRfiDGiRDrRwtpD(tw8RpasRvit2Riy4tRoa((.vtwRra.(reRyIwRvitstpastRvit2RystRy((RwtpD(tweRyIwRwtpD(tR
fiat4tsRGadtrRIDViRvitdUaaR
,.vRvit2RystRIaR,tvvtseRtrotGDy((2RfDviRstVyswRvaRvitDsRtrvyvtR,2RIyv.stUR
pasRftRiy4tR,tpastRosa4twpasRftRiy4tR,tpastRosa4twpasRftRiy4tR,tpastRosa4twpasRftRiy4tR,tpastRosa4tw8RDIRvitRostGtwDIVRGiyovtsreR,2Rp.((RDIrvyIGtrRvaRyRwtdaIrvsyvDaI8RyIwRDpRviyvR
GyIIavR,tRvia.VivRr.ppDGDtIveRitRVatrRaIRvaRVD4tRdastRosaapRDIRvitRpa((afDIVRn4tsrtrnUR

TMSTW9NTMWIHmyWSoRWEHoT!XHyWSCHWYoRHCWy!oTMSTW9NTMWIHmyWSoRWEHoT!XHyWSCHWYoRHCWy!oTMSTW9NTMWIHmyWSoRWEHoT!XHyWSCHWYoRHCWy!oTMSTW9NTMWIHmyWSoRWEHoT!XHyWSCHWYoRHCWy!oCWYoRHCWTMHWANmHCWSoRWFY!XTWN’Wy!ouWSoRWSWyHoTHoiHWN’W
iNoRHDoST!NoW’NCW!TCWmM!iMW!yWHJYSXXUWTCYHWN’WTMHWIHmyuWmMNWmHCHWoNW9HTTHCWTMSoWTMHWEHoT!XHyuW’NCW9H!oFW
Q9CSMSDayWyHHRuW’NCW9H!oFWi!CiYDi!yHRuW’NCWMS5!oFWTMHWiHCHDNo!SXWXSmuWSoRWNTMHCWNYTmSCRWAC!5!XHFHyCW’NCW
TMHUWmHCHWHJYSXXUW9NCoW!oWy!ouWSoRW9UWACSiT!iHWy!ooHCyuWSyWTMHWEHoT!XHyfWSoRWTM!yW!yWTCYHWN’WENRayWHXHiTW!oWSXXW
oST!NoyuWmMNWSCHWoNW9HTTHCW9UWoSTYCHuW9UW9!CTMuWTMSoWNTMHCyCWSyWRHyHC5!oFWN’WTMHWmCSTMWN’WENRWSyWTMHWCHyTCW
oNW9HTTHCW!oWTMH!CWTHDAHCyWSoRuWR!yANy!T!NoyuWNCW!oWTMHWHoRNmDHoTyWN’WTMH!CWD!oRyuWNCWNYTmSCRW
i!CiYDyTSoiHyWN’WX!’HCWoNCW9HTTHCWJYSX!’!HRWTNWCHiH!5HWSoRW!DACN5HWTMHWFCSiHWN’WENRW9HyTNmHRWNoWTMHDuW
TMSoWNTMHCy8W
(taodh 9v4
Rom_3:9-20. That the Jew is shut up under like condemnation with the Gentile is
proved by his own scripture.
are we better than they? — “do we excel them?”
No, in no wise — Better off the Jews certainly were, for having the oracles of God to teach
them better; but as they were no better, that only aggravated their guilt.
gtsFo 9v49.What then? He returns from his digression to his subject. For lest the Jews should object that
they were deprived of their right, as he had mentioned those distinctions of honor, for which they thought
themselves superior to the Gentiles, he now at length replies to the question — in what respect they
excelled the Gentiles. And though his answer seems in appearance to militate against what he had said
before, (for he now strips those of all dignity to whom he had attributed so much,) there is yet no discord; for
those privileges in which he allowed them to be eminent, were separate from themselves, and dependent on
God’ goodness, and not on their own merit: but here he makes inquiry as to their own worthiness, whether
they could glory in any respect in themselves. Hence the two answers he gives so agree together, that the
one follows from the other; for while he extols their privileges, by including them among the free benefits of
God, he shows that they had nothing of their own. Hence, what he now answers might have been easily
inferred; for since it was their chief superiority, that God’ oracles were DEPOSITED
with them, and they
had it not through their own merit, there was nothing left for them, on account of which they could glory
before God. Now mark the holy contrivance (sanctum artificium ) which he adopts; for when he ascribes pre*
eminency to them, he speaks in the third person; but when he strips them of all things, he puts himself
among them, that he might avoid giving offense.
For we have before brought a charge, etc. The Greek verb which Paul adopts, αἰτιάσθαι is properly a
forensic term; and I have therefore preferred to render it, “ have brought a charge;”
(96) for an accuser in an
action is said to charge a crime, which he is prepared to substantiate by testimonies and other proofs. Now
the Apostle had summoned all mankind universally before the tribunal of God, that he might include all under
the same condemnation: and it is to no purpose for any one to object, and say that the Apostle here not only
brings a charge, but more especially proves it; for a charge is not true except it depends on solid and strong
evidences, ACCORDING
to what Cicero says, who, in a certain place, distinguishes between a charge
and a slander. We must add, that to be under sin means that we are justly condemned as sinners before
God, or that we are held under the curse which is due to sin; for as righteousness brings with it absolution,
so sin is followed by condemnation.
(96)
So do [Grotius
] [Beza ] and [Stuart ] render the verb. [Doddridge ] and [Macknight ] have preserved our

common version. “ have before charged,” [Chalmers ] “Antea idoneis argumentis demonstravimus — we
have before proved by sufficient arguments” [Schleusner ] It is charge rather than conviction that the verb
imports, though the latter idea is also considered to be included. — Ed.

PULPIT, “
What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before

proved (or, charged, as in the Vulgate, causati sumus ) both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all
under sin. The meaning of the first part of this verse has been much discussed. We may observe:
(1) Τί οὗν seems to be rightly separated (as in Authorized Version) from προεχό:εθα because of the form
of the answer to the question, οὐ πάντως : after τί προεχό:εθα ; we should expectοὐδέν .
(2) The Jews, with whom St. Paul identifies himself, must be supposed to put the question; not the
Gentiles, as some have supposed. For there is nothing in the context to suggest the Gentiles as the
speakers, nor does what follow suit the supposition.
(3) The main question is as to the sense of προεχό:εθα , which occurs here only in the New Testament,
and has, therefore, to be interpreted from consideration of the sense of which the verb is capable, and the
probable drift of the argument. Some have taken it as a passive verb, with the meaning, "Are we
surpassed?" i.e. are we Jews in worse case than the Gentiles on account of our greater privileges? The
active verb, προέχειν , in the sense of "to excel," being both transitive and intransitive, its passive may be
used in the same sense. An instance QUOTED
∆ιός (Plut., 'Mor.,'), "cum Jove minores non sint." So the recent Revisers, though dissented from by the
American Committee. The strong objection to this interpretation is that there has been nothing so far even to
suggest any superiority of the Gentile to the Jew, and that what follows does not bear upon any such idea.
Thus to interpret would be to sacrifice the sense to supposed grammatical exigence, which, after all, is
uncertain. Taking, then, προεχό:εθα as the middle voice, we have two interpretations before us; either, with
Meyer, to render, Do we put forward (anything) in our defence?—which he maintains (though not
conclusively) to be the only proper sense of the middle verb—or (as in the Authorized Version), Are
we better (i.e. in better ease) than they? This rendering, though it gives essentially the same sense as
if προέχο:εν (intransitive) had been written, is commended by its suitableness to the course of argument,
and the middle voice may, perhaps, he ACCOUNTED for as denoting the Jews' supposed claim of
superiority for themselves. Thus the connection of thought is plain. The conclusion of Rom_2:1R29. had left
the Jews on the same footing with the Gentiles before God in respect of sinfulness. But then objections had
been raised on the ground of the acknowledged privileges of the chosen people; and such objections have
been met. The apostle now sums up the result: What, then, is the state of the case? Have we any
advantage to allege? No, not at all in the sense intended; the previous argument stands; and he proceeds to
confine his position from the testimony of the Old Testament itself.
STEDMAN, “I think it would be a little better to change this phrase from, "Are we any better?" to "Do we have any
standing at all?" For that is what Paul is really saying. He has looked over all of mankind, and says, "Is there any
ground by which a man or woman can please God apart from faith in Christ? Is there any way you can try to be
good an make it?" His answer: None at all. No one can make it on those terms.
He has already demonstrated the universal condition of both Jews and Gentiles. He showed that the blatantly wicked
people end up defying God, therefore they cannot make it. The morally self-righteous people, who pride themselves
on their good conduct and clean living, simply delude themselves, so they cannot make it. The unenlightened pagans
in all the jungles of the world, the concrete jungles as well as the green tropical jungles, defile their own
consciences; they do not make it because they do not live up to their own standards. The religious zealots deny in
deeds what they teach in words, and so they cannot make it. They are all wiped out.
Now comes the final touch. Paul gathers up what the Scriptures say on this subject. I like that. We are living in a day
when what men say is really considered the final word. The Scriptures are considered, but are not really taken as

authoritative. But the apostles never treated Scripture that way. They listened to what men said, but when it came to
the final authority, they said, "What Scripture says, that's it!"
We need to return to that in our preaching. Every preacher ought to close his message by saying, in effect, what
Walter Cronkite says at the end of every broadcast: "That's the way it is, this Sunday, January 18, 1976."
Paul gathers up a compilation of Scriptures from the Psalms and Proverbs and Isaiah to show that what he has
described, God has already said. The Scriptures he uses divide into three very clear groups. First, there is the
character of man, as God sees it; the conduct of man, in both speech and action; and the cause of all this.
HENRY, “Paul, having removed these objections, next revives his assertion of the general guilt and corruption of
mankind in common, both of Jews and Gentiles, v. 9-18. "Are we better than they, we Jews, to whom were
committed the oracles of God? Does this recommend us to God, or will this justify us? No, by no means." Or, "Are
we Christians (Jews and Gentiles) so much better antecedently than the unbelieving part as to have merited God's
grace? Alas! no: before free grace made the difference, those of us that had been Jews and those that had been
Gentiles were all alike corrupted." They are all under sin. Under the guilt of sin: under it as under a sentence;--under
it as under a bond, by which they are bound over to eternal ruin and damnation;--under it as under a burden (Ps.
xxxviii. 4) that will sink them to the lowest hell: we are guilty before God, v. 19. Under the government and
dominion of sin: under it as under a tyrant and cruel task-master, enslaved to it;--under it as under a yoke;--under the
power of it, sold to work wickedness. And this he had proved, proetiasametha. It is a law term: We have charged
them with it, and have made good our charge; we have proved the indictment, we have convicted them by the
notorious evidence of the fact. This charge and conviction he here further illustrates by several scriptures out of the
Old Testament, which describe the corrupt depraved state of all men, till grave restrain or change them; so that
herein as in a glass we may all of us behold our natural face. The  10th, 11th, and 12th verses are taken from Ps. xiv.
1-3, which are repeated as containing a very weighty truth, Ps. liii. 1-3. The rest that follows here is found in the
Septuagint translation of the 14th Psalm, which some think the apostle chooses to follow as better known; but I
rather think that Paul took these passages from other places of scripture here referred to, but in later copies of the
LXX. they were all added in Ps. xiv.  from this discourse of Paul. It is observable that, to prove the general
corruption of nature, he quotes some scriptures which speak of the particular corruptions of particular persons, as of
Doeg (Ps. cxl. 3), of the Jews (Isa. lix. 7, 8), which shows that the same sins that are committed by one are in the
nature of all. The times of David and Isaiah were some of the better times, and yet to their days he refers. What is
said Ps. xiv.  is expressly spoken of all the children of men, and that upon a particular view and inspection made by
God himself. The Lord looked down, as upon the old world, Gen. vi. 5. And this judgment of God was according to
truth. He who, when he himself had made all, looked upon every thing that he had made, and behold all was very
good, now that man had marred all, looked, and behold all was very bad. Let us take a view of the particulars.
BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR, “Nominal Christians compared with heathen
1. Have much advantage every way (
Rom_3:2).
2. Are no better.
3. Are all alike under sin. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Man under sin,
inasmuch as—
I. He is under the imputation of sin. And whose sin? Adam’s; for he had been placed by his
Maker in the situation of head and representative of all his descendants. And because he
rendered himself guilty, therefore we, being in him and identified with him, were made sharers
of his guilt. This, of course, is a statement against which the pride of human reason will rebel.
But if you will listen to the Word of God, turn to Rom_5:12, etc. And what puts this matter
beyond all doubt is the way in which all through that passage Paul represents our sin and
condemnation in Adam, as parallel and as correspondent to our righteousness and salvation by

Christ. He tells you here, that just as believers are accounted righteous in Christ’s righteousness,
so they were held as sinners on account of Adam’s sin. As Christ’s obedience now justifies them,
because accounted theirs, so was Adam’s disobedience.
II. His nature is under the degrading and polluting influence of sin. Now this also he inherits
from Adam. “Original sin is the fault and corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is
engendered of the offspring of Adam; whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness,
and is of his own nature inclined to evil” (Art. 9; Gen_6:5; Gen 8:21; Psa_51:5; Rom_7:18; Rom
8:7). In support of this we may appeal—
1. To the individual conscience.
2. To the page of history.
3. To the witness of travellers.
4. To the reports of newspapers.
III. He is held in bondage by the tyranny of sin. This is more than being depraved and corrupt:
it is a positive enslaving of the will. Man cannot of himself turn from evil to God. The condition
of man after the fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own natural
strength and good works, to faith and calling upon God. Wherefore we have no power to do good
works, pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing us, that we
may have a good will, and working with us when we have that good will” (Art. 10; Rom_5:6;
Eph_2:1; 1Co_2:14).
1. Well may this thought stir us earnestly to cry to God to send down His Spirit, and give us
the strength He only can communicate.
2. Sin, indeed, would whisper, “You can do nothing, and therefore you need not care; the
fault is not your own.” Perish the thought! No, rather say, “I can do nothing; therefore, O
God, create Thou a clean heart and renew a right spirit within me.”
IV. He is under the condemnation and the curse of sin.
1. AS a partaker of Adam’s guilt, he is included in the sentence of Adam’s punishment.
2. As he is corrupt, he incurs the wrath due to his own iniquity.
3. As one sold under sin, he must, if left to himself, be consigned to a hopeless state of
misery (Eph_2:3; Rom_7:5; Rom 6:23).
Conclusion:
1. Have we felt these truths so as to cry, “What must I do to be saved”? That is the question
which constitutes the first step in the way of salvation.
2. The gospel brings us instead of Adam’s guilt, Christ’s righteousness; instead of inherent
corruption, the counteracting balm of the Holy Spirit; instead of the bondage of sin, “the
glorious liberty of the children of God”; instead of “the wages of sin,” which “is death,” the
“gift of God, eternal life.” (J. Harding, M. A.)
Sin as revealed by conscience and Scripture
I. Paul had appealed to the conscience of the Jews, and in chap. 2. affirmed and enlarged upon
their guilt. He can scarcely be said to have proved it; he had only charged them with it; and yet
through the conscience of those whom we address it is possible that a charge may no sooner be
uttered than conviction may come on the back of it. There is often a power in a bare statement

which is not at all bettered but rather impaired by reasoning. If what you say of a man agree with
his own experience, there is a weight in your simple affirmation which needs no enforcing. It
was this which mostly gained acceptance for the apostles. They revealed to men the secrets of
their own hearts; and what the inspired teachers said they were, they felt themselves to be. This
manifestation of the truth unto the conscience is the grand instrument still. That obstinacy of
unbelief, which we vainly attempt to carry by the power of any elaborate demonstration, may
give way, both with the untaught and the cultivated, to the bare statement of the preacher, when
he simply avers the ungodliness of the human heart.
II. He now refers the Jews to their own Scriptures, and, in so doing, he avails himself of a
peculiarly proper instrument. Thus Christ expounded what was written in the law of Moses, and
in the prophets, and in almost every interview the apostles had with the Hebrews, you will meet
with this as a peculiarity which is absent when Gentiles only are addressed—e.g., Stephen, Peter,
Paul at Antioch, Thessalonica, etc. He who was all things to all men was a Jew among the Jews.
He reasoned with them on their own principles, and nowhere more frequently than in this
Epistle.
III. It is this agreement between the Bible and conscience which stamps upon the Book of God
one of its most satisfying evidences. It is this perhaps more than anything else which draws the
interest and the notice of men towards it. For there is no way of fixing the attention of man so
powerfully as by holding up to him a mirror of himself; and no wisdom which he more prizes
than that which by its piercing and intelligent glance can open to him the secrecies of his own
heart, and force him to recognise a marvellous accordancy between its positions and all the
varieties of his own intimate and home-felt experience. The question, then, before us is, Does
this passage bear such an accordancy with the real character of man? It abounds in affirmations
of sweeping universality, and a test of their truth or of their falsehood is to be found in every
heart. The apostle has here made a most adventurous commitment of himself; for the matters
here touched upon all lie within the well-known chambers of a man’s own consciousness, and
one single case of disagreement would be enough to depose him from all the credit which he has
ever held in the estimation of the world. Of course, from the nature of the case, a withdrawment
must be conceded in behalf of those who are under the gospel, yet we are prepared to assert that
Paul has not overcharged the account that he has given of the depravity of those who are under
law—whether it be the law of conscience, or of Moses, or even of the purer morality of Christ—
insomuch that all who refuse the mysteries of His grace are universally in the wrong. Be assured,
then, that there is a delusion in all the complacency associated with self-righteousness. It is the
want of a godly principle which essentially vitiates the whole: and additional to this, with all the
generosities and equities which have done so much for your reputation among men, there is a
selfishness that lurks in your bosom; or a vanity that swells and inflames it; or a preference of
your own object to that of others, which may lead you to acts or words of unfeeling severity; or a
regard for some particular gratification, coupled with a regardlessness for every interest which
lieth in the way, that may render you, in the estimation of Him who pondereth the heart, as
remote a wanderer as he on the path of whose visible history there occurred in other times the
atrocities of savage cruelty and savage violence. It were barbarous to tell you so had we no
remedy to offer. Life has much to vex and to trouble it; and it were really cruel to add to the
pressure of a creature so beset and borne in upon by telling him of his worthlessness, did we not
stand before him charged with the tidings of his possible renovation (Rom_2:21-26). (T.
Chalmers, D. D.)
Sin: revealed by conscience
A fashionable lady entered church in a strange place, and heard a sermon on human depravity.

During the week the preacher called upon her, when she told him she did not believe in the
doctrine of his sermon. He asked the lady to test the subject by reviewing her life, alone before
God, to see if all her acts had been done from right motives, which she promised to do. The next
day the preacher called again, when the lady confessed that she did not find one bright spot of
conscious love to God in all her past life. A look within had convinced her of the truth of the
doctrine. Feeling now the disease of sin, she went to the Great Physician and found a cure.
Sin: revealed by grace
When the light of God’s grace comes into your heart, it is something like the opening of the
windows of an old cellar that has been shut up for many days. Down in that cellar, which has not
been opened for many months, are all kinds of loathsome creatures, and a few sickly plants
blanched by the darkness. The walls are dark, and damp by the trail of reptiles: it is a horrid,
filthy place, which no one would willingly enter. You may walk there in the dark very securely,
and, except now and then for the touch of some slimy creature, you would not believe the place
was so bad and filthy. Open those shutters, clean a pane of glass, let a little light in, and now see
how a thousand noxious things have made this place their habitation! Sure, it was not the light
that made this place so horrible; but it was the light that showed how horrible it was before. So
let God’s grace just open a window, and let the light into a man’s soul, and he will stand
astonished to see at what a distance he is from God. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The reign of sin
I. Universal.
1. Over all men.
2. Over every faculty of man.
II. Ruinous.
1. To happiness.
2. To peace.
3. To moral power.
4. To hope. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Superior sinners
I remember a gentleman taking exception to an address based upon this text. He said, “Do you
mean to say that there is no difference between an honest man and a dishonest one; between a
sober man and a temperate man?” “No,” I remarked, “I did not affirm that there was no room
for comparison between such cases; but my position is that if two men were standing here, the
one intemperate and the other sober, I should say of the one, “This is an intemperate sinner, and
the other a sober sinner.” My friend did not know how to meet the difficulty, but answered,
“Well, I don’t like such teaching.” Very quietly I replied, “Then I will make some concession, and
meet your difficulty. I will admit that there are many ‘superior sinners,’ and that you are a
‘superior sinner.’” I shall not soon forget my friend’s expression of countenance when he had
taken stock of the argument. (H. Varley.)

Human depravity
I. Universal. Jew and Gentile. None righteous, wise, faithful.
II. Total. In—
1. Word;
2. Deed;
3. Thought;
4. Purpose.
III. Ruinous. All—
1. Guilty;
2. Condemned;
3. Without hope. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Human depravity
I. Wherein it consists (Rom_2:9-18).
II. How it is demonstrated. By the law (Rom_2:20).
III. What is the effect (Rom_2:19)? (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Human depravity: its deceitfulness and the occasion of its manifestation
In a vessel filled with muddy water, the thickness visibly subsided to the bottom, and left the
water purer and purer, until at last it seemed perfectly limpid. The slightest motion, however,
brought the sediment again to the top; and the water became thick and turbid as before.
“Here,” said Gotthold, when he saw it, “we have an emblem of the human heart. The heart is full
of the mud of sinful lusts and carnal desires; and the consequence is, that no pure water—that is,
good and holy thoughts—can flow from it. It is, in truth, a miry pit and slough of sin, in which all
sorts of ugly reptiles are bred and crawl. Many a one, however, is deceived by it, and never
imagines his heart half so wicked as it really is, because sometimes its lusts are at rest, and sink
to the bottom. But this lasts only so long as he is without opportunity or incitement to sin. Let
that occur, and worldly lusts rise so thick, that his whole thoughts, words, and works show no
trace of anything but slime and impurity. One is meek as long as he is not thwarted; cross him,
and he is like powder ignited by the smallest spark, and blazing up with a loud report and
destructive effect. Another is temperate so long as he has no jovial companions; a third chaste
while the eyes of men are upon him.
Human depravity: its outward development from laten t germs of evil
A few years ago, a house was built at Newcastle-upon-Tyne; and the earth which was dug out of
the foundations was thrown over a piece of ground in front, intended for a garden. The following
spring a number of caper plants came up: they were not common in that part of the country, and
their appearance excited great surprise. Upon inquiry, it was found that, years before, that
ground had been a public garden: it therefore appeared certain that those seeds had remained
dormant while buried deep in the earth, and had sprung to life as soon as they were brought
within the influence of heat and light. How like to our hearts! What seeds of evil may lie

dormant in them! (C. H. Spurgeon.)
Haman depravity: its universality
The greatest of unregenerate men are as much in need of new hearts as the meanest of their
fellows. There be some men that are born into this world master spirits, who walk about it as
giants, wrapped in mantles of light and glory. I refer to the poets, men who rise aloft, like
Colossi, mightier than we, seeming to be descended from celestial spheres. There be ethers of
acute intellect, who, searching into mysteries of science, discover things that have been hidden
from the creation of the world; men of keen research, and mighty erudition; and yet, of each of
these—poet, philosopher, metaphysician, and great discoverer-it must be said, “The carnal mind
is enmity against God!” Ye may train an unrenewed man, ye may make his intellect almost
angelic, ye may strengthen his soul until he shall unravel mysteries in a moment; ye may make
him so mighty, that he can read the iron secrets of the eternal hills, tearing the hidden truth
from the bowels of ancient marvels; ye may give him an eye so keen that he can penetrate the
arcana of rocks and mountains; ye may add a soul so potent, that he may slay the giant Sphinx,
that had for ages troubled the mightiest men of learning; yet, when ye have done all, his mind
shall be a depraved one, and his carnal heart shall still be in opposition to God, unless the Holy
Spirit shall create him anew in Christ Jesus. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
The importance of civil government to society
I. The apostle’s conclusion is, that before God all the world is guilty, and if we single out those
verses which place man in his simple relationship to God, we shall see the justice of the
sentence.
1. “There is none righteous, no, not one.” To be held as having kept the law of our country,
we must keep the whole of it. It is not necessary that we accumulate the guilt of treason,
forgery, murder. One of these acts is enough to condemn. A hundred deeds of obedience will
not efface or expiate one of disobedience; and we have only to plead for the same obedience
to a Divine that we render to a human administration, to prove that there is none righteous
before God.
2. “There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.” No man who has
not submitted himself to the doctrine of justification by faith has any clear knowledge of the
ground on which he rests his acceptance with God. He may have some obscure conception of
His mercy, but he has never struck the compromise between His mercy and His justice.
What becomes of all that which stamps authority upon a law, and exhibits the Majesty of a
Lawgiver, is a matter of which he has no understanding, and he does not care to understand
it. He is seeking after many things, but not seeking after God. When did your efforts in this
way ever go beyond an empty round of observances?
3. “They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable, there is none
that doeth good; no, not one.” We do not say that they have gone out of the way of honour,
equity, or neighbourliness. But they are all out of the way of godliness. The prophet does not
affirm that we have turned everyone to a way either of injustice or cruelty; but he counts it
condemnation enough that we have turned everyone to his own way—a way of independence
of God, if not of iniquity against our fellows in society. It is this which renders all the works
of mere natural men so unprofitable, that is, of no value in the reckoning of eternity. They
want the great moral infusion which makes them valuable. There is nothing of God in them.

II. We now pass onward to another set of charges—which may not be so easy to substantiate—of
offences against the dearest interests of society. It is true that the apostle here drops the style of
universality, and quotes David’s charges, not against the race, but against his enemies. But yet it
will be found that though the picture of atrocity may not in our day be so broadly exhibited as in
ruder periods, yet that the principles of it are still at work; that though law and civilisation and
interest may have stopped the mouth of many a desolating volcano, yet do the fiery materials
still exist in the bosom of society. So that our nature, though here personified by the apostle into
a monster, with a throat like an open sepulchre, emitting everything offensive; and a tongue
practised in the arts of deceitfulness; and lips from which the gall of malignity ever drops in
unceasing distillation; and a mouth full of venomous asperity; and feet that run to assassination
as a game; and with the pathway on which she runs marked by the ruin and distress that attend
upon her progress; and with a disdainful aversion in her heart to peace; and with an aspect of
defiance to the God that gave all her parts and all her energies—though this sketch was originally
taken by the Psalmist from prowling banditti, yet has the apostle, by admitting it into his
argument, stamped a perpetuity upon it, and made it universal—giving us to understand that if
such was the character of man, as it stood nakedly out among the hostilities of a barbarous
people, such also is the real character of man among the regularities and the monotonous
decencies of modern society. To illustrate: Oaths were more frequent at one time than they are
now, but while there may be less of profaneness in the mouths, there may be as much as ever in
the heart. Murder in the act may be less frequent now, but if he who hateth his brother be a
murderer, it may be fully as foul and frequent in the principle. Actual theft may be no longer
practised by him who gives vent to an equal degree of dishonesty through the chicaneries of
merchandise. And thus may there lurk under the disguises of well-bred citizenship enough to
prove that, with the duties of the second table as with the first, man has wandered far from the
path of rectitude.
III. All this, while it gives a most humiliating estimate of our species, should serve to enhance to
our minds the blessings of regular government. Let our police and magistrates depose to the
effect it would have upon society, were civil guardianship dissolved. Were all the restraints of
order driven in, conceive the effect, and then compute how little there is of moral, and how
much there is of mere animal restraint in the apparent virtues of human society. There is a two-
fold benefit in such a contemplation. It will enhance to every Christian mind the cause of loyalty,
and lead him to regard the power that is, as the minister of God to him for good. And it will also
guide him through many delusions to appreciate justly the character of man; to distinguish
aright between the semblance of principle and its reality.
IV. Learn three lessons from all that has been said.
1. As to the theology of this question. We trust you perceive how much and how little it is
that can be gathered from the comparative peace and gentleness of modern society; how
much is due to the physical restraints that are laid on by this world’s government, and how
little is due to the moral restraints that are laid on by the unseen government of Heaven:
proving that human nature is more like the tractableness of an animal led about by a chain,
than of an animal inwardly softened into docility. On this point observation and orthodoxy
are at one; and one of the most convincing illustrations which the apostle can derive to his
own doctrine may be taken from the testimony of legal functionaries. Let them simply aver
what the result would be if all the earthly safeguards of law and of government were driven
away; and they are just preaching orthodoxy to our ears.
2. The very same train of argument which goes to enlighten the theology of this subject,
serves also to deepen and establish the principles of loyalty. That view of the human
character, upon which it is contended, by the divine, that unless it is regenerated there can
be no meetness for heaven, is the very same with that view of it upon which it is contended,

by the politician, that unless it is restrained there will be no safety from crime and violence
along the course of the pilgrimage which leads to it. An enlightened Christian recognises the
hand of God in all the shelter that is thrown over him from the fury of the natural elements;
and he equally recognises it in all the shelter that is thrown over him from the fury of the
moral elements by which he is surrounded. Had he a more favourable view of our nature he
might not look on government as so indispensable; but, with the view that he actually has, he
cannot miss the conclusion of its being the ordinance of Heaven for the Church’s good upon
earth; and he rejoices in the authority of human laws as an instrument in the hand of God
for the peace of His sabbaths, and the peace of His sacraments.
3. Let our legislators recognise the value of true religion. When Solomon says that it is
righteousness which exalteth a nation, he means something of a deeper and more sacred
character than the mere righteousness of society. Cut away the substratum of godliness, and
how, we ask, will the secondary and the earth-born righteousness be found to thrive on the
remaining soil which nature supplies for rearing it? But with many, and these too the
holders of a great and ascendant influence in our land, godliness is puritanism; and thus is it
a possible thing that in their hands the alone aliment of public virtue may be withheld, or
turned into poison. The patent way to disarm Nature of her ferocities is to Christianise her.
For note—
(1) Though social virtue and loyalty may exist in the upper walks of life apart from
godliness—yet godliness, in the hearts of those who have the brunt of all the common
and popular temptations to stand against, is the main and effective hold that we have
upon them for securing the righteousness of their lives.
(2) The despisers of godliness are the enemies of the true interest of our nation; and it is
possible that, under the name of Methodism, that very instrument may be put away
which can alone recall the departing virtues of our land.
(3) Where godliness exists, loyalty exists; and no plausible delusion—no fire of their own
kindling, lighted at the torch of false or spurious patriotism, will ever eclipse the light of
this plain authoritative Scripture—“Honour the king, and meddle not with those who are
given to change.”
(4) Though Christianity may only work the salvation of a few, it raises the standard of
morality among many. The reflex influence of one sacred character upon his vicinity may
soften, and purify, and overawe many others, even where it does not spiritualise them.
This is encouragement to begin with.
(5) Alarming as the aspect of the times is, and deeply tainted and imbued as the minds
of many are with infidelity, and widely spread as the habit has become of alienation from
all the ordinances of religion, yet the honest and persevering goodwill of one imbued
with the single-hearted benevolence of the gospel will always meet with respect. He who,
had he met a minister of religion or of the state, would have cursed him, had he met the
Sabbath school teacher who ventured across his threshold might have tried to bear a
repulsive front against him, but would have found it to be impossible. Here is a feeling
which even the irreligion of the times has not obliterated, and it has left, as it were, an
open door of access, through which we might at length find our way to the landing place
of a purer and better generation. (T. Chalmers, D. D.)
There is none righteous, no, not one.
None righteous

Had there been one righteous, God would have found him out. (T. Robinson, D. D.)
There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.—
Human ignorance and perversity
I. There is none that understandeth.
1. What? Ignorance is not affirmed of many things of more or less importance. A man may
be an accomplished scientist, a profound scholar, widely read in general literature, and yet
not understand—
(1) His guilt;
(2) His duty;
(3) His responsibility;
(4) His Saviour;
(5) His destiny.
2. Why? Because—
(1) He does not want to. Ignorance is fancied bliss. He is not troubled by qualms of
conscience, a sense of God’s anger, an anticipation of judgment. A practical knowledge of
these things would trouble him.
(2) He will not; and that in spite of the witness of both Nature and Revelation. He might
understand if he would.
II. There is none that seeketh after God. There are many who “seek after” matters infinitely less
important—temporal profit, pleasure, etc.
1. The folly of this.
(1) The sick will not seek after their Physician.
(2) The ignorant after their Teacher.
(3) Sinners after their Saviour.
2. The necessity and blessedness of reversing this.
(1) God must be sought, for men have lost Him.
(2) When sought, God will be found—and as all that the soul can possibly want. (J. W.
Burn.)
They are all gone out of the way.—
Practical error
I. Its source.
II. Its manifestations.
III. Its predominance.
IV. Its effects. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

Progress in sin inevitable
Every sin we commit is like taking a step further back from God: and return is rendered
impossible without Divine assistance, as Satan cuts the bridges behind man in his retreating
downward path; and also as every false step necessitates another—rather indeed many—as the
author of Waverley Novels knew to his cost, and left it on record: “Oh, what a tangled web we
weave, when first we practise to deceive!” Or again, as Schiller more philosophically puts it:
“This is the very curse of evil deed, that of new evil it becomes the seed.”
The sin and folly of ignoring God
Why did you not think of God? One would deem that the thought of Him must, to a serious
mind, come second to almost every other thought. The thought of virtue would suggest the
thought of both a lawgiver and a rewarder; the thought of crime, of an avenger; the thought of
sorrow, of a consoler; the thought of an inscrutable mystery, of an intelligence that understands
it; the thought of that ever-moving activity that prevails in the system of the universe, of a
supreme agent; the thought of the human family, of a great father; the thought of all-being, of a
creator; the thought of life, of a preserver; and the thought of death, of an incontrollable
disposer. By what dexterity of irreligious caution did you avoid precisely every track where the
idea of Him would have met you, or elude that idea if it came? And what must sound reason
pronounce of a mind which, in the train of millions of thoughts, has wandered to all things
under the sun, to all the permanent objects or vanishing appearances in the creation, but never
fixed its thought on the supreme reality; never approached, like Moses, “to see this great sight.”
(J. Foster.)
Their throat is an open sepulchre.—
The throat of an ungodly man compared to an opened sepulchre
I. I have to mention some particulars in which the throat of man is “an open sepulchre” in
regard to that which it receives: I mean, in regard to the air we breathe, and the food and
beverage we eat and drink.
1. This is true universally of every unregenerate man. Every breath of air that is breathed by
a man who is not born of God, and every morsel of food that he eats, is but like the carrying a
putrid corpse into a vault. He is supporting his body for the dishonour of God. It is not in the
service of his heavenly Father, but in the service of his Father’s enemies, that he uses all his
strength and health, and all his bodily powers; he is guilty of abusing God’s gracious gifts; he
is steadily going forward into increased corruption.
2. But if in this way it holds good of all who are not restored to God, even the most
abstemious, that “their throat is no better than an opened sepulchre,” how much more does
it give us a striking view of the wretched state of the intemperate: the gluttonous and the
drunkard? Well does the wisdom of God compare the throats of all such wretched sinners to
an opened sepulchre, corrupt in themselves, infectious to others, and offensive to God. Can
such a man expect to dwell with God in holiness and glory? Would you yourselves consent to
have an “opened sepulchre,” with all its abominations, in your house? Would you tolerate
anything so offensive? Much less can you suppose that God will suffer a drunkard to be
anywhere but in the depths of hell.
II. I now proceed to enumerate a few particulars in which the throat of every unregenerate man
is also like “an open sepulchre” in that which proceeds out of it.
1. But let me first say a word generally to those who are Christians in name only. As in

regard to what goes in, so in regard to what comes forth from your throat, it is still but an
“open sepulchre.”
2. In descending to particulars, I must be content to mention only one of the multitude of
sins that make the “throat of sinners an open sepulchre”; and that is, the sin of blasphemy,
and swearing, and profaneness. And if an opened sepulchre is odious because it sends forth
the smell of death, well may we say that the mouth of the profane is like it, for it breathes the
breath of spiritual and eternal death. (John Tucker, B. D.)
Dignity of human nature shown from its ruins
1. A most dark and dismal picture of humanity, and yet it has two aspects. In one view it is
the picture of weakness, wretchedness, and shame; in the other it presents a being fearfully
great; great in his evil will, his demoniacal passions, his contempt of fear, the splendour of
his degradation, and the magnificence of his woe.
2. It has been the way of many to magnify humanity by tracing its capabilities and its affinity
with God and truth; and by such kind of evidences they repel what they call the insulting
doctrine of total depravity. And not without some show of reason, when the doctrine is
asserted so as to exclude the admission of high aspirations and amiable properties; for some
teachers have formulated a doctrine of human depravity in which there is no proper
humanity left.
3. Now one of these extremes makes the gospel unnecessary, because there is no
depravation to restore; the other makes it impossible, because there is nothing left to which
any holy appeal can be made; but I undertake, in partial disregard of both, to show the
essential greatness of man from the ruin itself which he becomes; confident of this, that in
no other point of view will he prove the spiritual sublimity of his nature so convincingly.
I. We form our conceptions of many things by their ruins.
1. Of ancient dynasties. Falling on patches of paved road leading out from ancient Rome,
here for Britain, here for Germany, here for Ephesus, etc.; imagining the couriers flying back
and forth, bearing the mandates of the central authority, followed by the military legions to
execute them; we receive an impression of the empire which no words could give us. So, to
form some opinion of the dynasty of the Pharaohs, of whom history gives us but the
obscurest traditions, we have only to look on the monumental mountains, and these dumb
historians in stone will show us more of that vast and populous empire than history and
geography together.
2. Of ancient cities. Though described by historians, we form no sufficient conception of
their grandeur till we look upon their ruins. Even the eloquence of Homer yields only a faint,
unimpressive conception of Thebes; but to pass through the ruins of Karnac and Luxor, a
vast desolation of temples and pillared avenues that dwarf all the present structures of the
world. This reveals a fit conception of the grandest city of the world as no words could
describe it. So Jonah endeavours to raise some adequate opinion of Nineveh, and Nahum
follows, magnifying its splendour in terms of high description; but no one had any proper
conception of it till a traveller opens to view, at points many miles asunder, collects the
tokens of art and splendour, and says, “This is the ‘exceeding great city.’” And so it is with
Babylon, Ephesus, Tadmor of the Desert, Baalbec, and the nameless cities and pyramids of
the extinct American race.
II. So it is with man. Our most veritable, though saddest impression of his greatness, we shall
derive from the magnificent ruin he displays.

1. And this is the Scripture representation of man, as apostate from duty and God. How
sublime a creature must that be who is able to confront the Almighty and tear himself away
from His throne! And, as if to forbid our taking his deep misery and shame as tokens of
contempt, the first men are shown as living out a thousand years of lustful energy, and
braving the Almighty in strong defiance to the last. We look upon a race of Titans who fill the
earth—even up to the sky—with demoniacal tumult, till God can suffer them no longer. So of
the picture in chap. 1, and the picture in the text corresponds.
2. But we come to the ruin as it is, and we look—
(1) Upon the false religions of the world; pompous and costly rites transacted before
crocodiles and onions; magnificent temples built over monstrous creatures, carved by
men’s hands; children offered up by their mothers; gorgeous palaces and majestic
trappings studded all over with beetles in gold, or precious stones, to serve as a
protection against pestilences, poisons, and accidents. A picture of ruin—yet how
magnificent! For how high a nature must that be that it must prepare such pomps, incur
such sacrifices, and can elevate such trifles of imposture to a place of reverence! If we say
that in all this it is feeling after God, then how inextinguishable and grand are those
religious instincts by which it is allied to Him!
(2) The wars of the world. What opinion should we have of the fearful passion of a race
of animals, who marshal themselves by the hundred thousand, marching across
kingdoms and deserts, “swift to shed blood,” and strewing leagues of ground with dead?
(verse 16). One race there is that figure in these heroics, viz., the tiny race of ants, whom
God has made a spectacle to mock the glory of human wars. Plainly enough man is a
creature in ruins, but how magnificent! Mean as the ant in his passions, but erecting, on
the desolations he makes, thrones of honour and renown; for who of us can live content
without some hero to admire and worship?
(3) The persecutions of the good; poison for Socrates, a cross for Jesus. What does it
mean? No other than this, that cursing and bitterness, the poison even of asps, and more,
is entered into the heart of man. He hates with a diabolical hatred. And what a being is
this that can be stung with so great madness by the spectacle of a good and holy life! The
fiercest of animals are capable of no such devilish instigation.
(4) The great characters of the world. On a small island of the southern Atlantic is shut
up a remarkable prisoner, wearing himself out there in a feeble mixture of peevishness
and jealousy, solaced by no great thoughts and no heroic spirit. And this is the great
conqueror of the modern world; a man who carried the greatest victories, and told the
meanest lies; who, destitute of private magnanimity, had stupendous powers of
understanding and will. How great a being must it be that makes a point of so great
dignity before the world, despite of so much that is contemptible! But he is not alone.
The immortal Kepler, piloting science into the skies, and comprehending the vastness of
heaven, only proves the magnificence of man as a ruin, when you discover the strange
ferment of irritability and “superstition wild,” in which his great thoughts are brewed,
and his mighty life dissolved. So also Bacon—“The greatest, wisest, meanest of
mankind.” Probably no one has raised himself to a higher pitch of renown by his
superlative genius than Shakespeare; flowering out, nevertheless, into such eminence of
glory, on a compost of buffoonery, and other vile stuff, which he so covers with
splendour, and irradiates with beauty, that disgust itself is lost in the vehemence of
praise.
III. But we must look more directly into the contents of human nature and the internal ruin by
which they are displayed. And notice—

1. The sublime vehemence of the passions.
(1) What a creature must that be who, out of mere revenge, will deliberately take the life
of a fellow man, and then despatch his own to avoid the ignominy of a public execution!
No tiger is ever instigated by any so intense and terrible passion.
(2) Or take the passion of covetousness. How great a creature must that be who is
goaded by a zeal of acquisition so restless, so self-sacrificing, so insatiable! The poor,
gaunt miser were even the greatest of heroes if he could deny himself with so great
patience in a good cause.
(3) The same is true even of the licentious lusts. No race of animals can show the parallel
of such vices, because they are none of them instigated by a nature so great in wants that
find no good to satisfy them.
2. The wild mixtures of thought displayed both in the waking life and the dreams of
mankind. How grand! how mean! It is as if the soul were a thinking ruin. The angel and the
demon life appear to be contending in it. And yet a ruin which a Nineveh or a Thebes can
parallel only in the faintest degree; comprehending all that is purest, brightest, most Divine;
all that is worst, meanest, most deformed.
3. The significance of remorse. How great a creature must that be that, looking down upon
itself from some high summit in itself, withers in relentless condemnation of itself, gnaws
and chastises itself in the sense of what it is!
4. The dissonance and obstinacy of his evil will. It is dissonant as being out of harmony with
God and the world, and all beside in the soul itself—viz., the reason, the conscience, the
wants, the hopes, and even the remembrances of the soul. How great a creature is it that,
knowing God, can set itself off from God and resist Him! “There is no fear of God before
their eyes.” In one view there is fear enough, the soul is all its life long haunted by this fear,
but there is a desperation of will that makes it as though it were not.
5. The religious aspirations and capacities of religious attraction that are garnered up, and
still live in the ruins of humanity.
IV. The practical issues of our subject.
1. It is a great hope of our time that society is going to slide into something better—by
education, public reforms, and philanthropy. We have a new gospel that corresponds, which
preaches faith in human nature, that proposes development, not regeneration. Alas, that we
are taken with so great folly. As if man, or society, crazed and maddened by the demoniacal
frenzy of sin, were going to reconstruct the shattered harmony of nature. As soon will the
desolations of Karnac gather up their fragments. Nothing meets our case but to be born of
God. He alone can rebuild the ruin.
2. The great difficulty with Christianity in our time is that it is too great for belief. After all
our supposed discoveries of dignity in human nature, we have commonly none but the
meanest opinion of man. How could we imagine that any such history as that of Jesus Christ
is a fact, or that the infinite God has transacted any such wonder for man? God manifest in
the flesh! It is extravagant, out of proportion, who can believe it? Anyone who has not lost
the magnitude of man. To restore this tragic fall required a tragic salvation. Nor did ever any
sinner, who had felt the bondage of his sin, think for one moment that Christ was too great a
Saviour. Oh, it was an almighty Saviour that he wanted! none but such was sufficient! Him
he could believe in, just because He was great—equal to the measures of his want, able to
burst the bondage of his sin.
3. The magnitude and real importance of the soul are discovered in the subject as nowhere

else. The soul appears under sin, all selfish as it is, to shrink and grow small in its own sight.
Perhaps this is due, in part, to the consciousness we have, in sin, of moral littleness and
meanness. Whereas, in another sense, sin is mighty, God-defying. Just here is it that you will
get your most veritable impressions of your immortality; even as you get your best
impression of armies, not by the count of numbers, but by the thunder shock of battle, and
the carnage of the field when it is over. In the tragic desolations of intelligence and genius, of
passion, pride, and sorrow, behold the import of his eternity. And yet, despite all this, you
are trying and contriving still to be happy—a happy ruin! The eternal destiny is in you, and
you cannot break loose from it. With your farthing bribes you try to hush your stupendous
wants. Oh, this great and mighty soul, were it something less, you might find what to do with
it. Anything would please it and bring it content. But it is the godlike soul, capable of rest in
nothing but God; able to be filled and satisfied with nothing but His fulness. (H. Bushnell, D.
D.)
Wickedness in word and deed
I. In speech. These verses refer to the different organs of speech, and show them all exercising
their power to hurt, under the dominion of sin.
1. The throat (larynx) is compared to a sepulchre; this refers to the language of the gross and
brutal man, of whom it is said in common parlance—it seems as if he would like to eat you.
The next characteristic is a contrast—the sugared tongue, which charms you like a melodious
instrument. Doth of these are taken from the description of David’s enemies in Psa_5:9.
3. The next is taken from Psa_140:3 —the calumny and falsehood which malignant lips give
forth, as a serpent infuses its poison.
(4) Verse 14. The wickedness which is cast into your face by a mouth full of hatred or
bitterness (Psa_10:7).
II. In deed (verses 15-18). Of the four propositions the first three are borrowed from Isa_59:7-8.
1. The feet as the emblem of walking symbolises the whole conduct.
2. Man acts without regard to his neighbour, without fear of compromising his welfare or
even his life (Pro_1:16). He oppresses his brother, and fills his life with misery, so that the
way marked out by such a course is watered with the tears of others.
3. No peace can exist either in the heart of such men, or in their neighbourhood.
4. And this overflow of depravity and suffering arises from a void; the absence of that feeling
which should have filled the heart—“the fear of God.” This term is the normal expression for
piety in the Old Testament; it is that disposition which has God always present in the heart,
will and judgment. The words “before their eyes” show that it belongs to man freely to evoke
or suppress this inward view of God on which his moral conduct depends (Psa_36:1). (Prof.
Godet.)
The poison of asps is under their lips.—
Poisonous speech
Poison concealed in a bag under a loose tooth or fang: the fang pressing the bag, the poison is
emitted with the bite. Honey on the lips, poison under them. Poison conveyed—

1. In ordinary conversation.
2. In wanton and licentious songs.
3. In profane and blasphemous expressions.
4. In infidel and unscriptural teaching.
5. In corrupting works of fiction.
6. In the language of the drama. (T. Robinson, D. D.)
The poison of the tongue
Suppose I open a bag of serpents, and let them out where children are playing, or in a camp
where there are soldiers, and I say of myself, “Madman I fool!” and go to hunt my snakes? I
cannot find them. It was mine to let them out, but it is not mine to catch them and put them in
the bag again. Now there never was a bag of snakes in this world like a man’s mouth. To open it
is in your power, but to shut it again upon all that you have emitted from it is not in your power.
I am not referring to cases in which a man himself suffers directly from the evil that he has done;
but to those worse cases in which others suffer from the evil that we have done. For, as a man
grows spiritual, as a man goes toward God he comes to feel that the mischiefs done on another
are unspeakably worse than those done on himself; and that no unrepentable transgressions are
as bad as those by which he has struck the welfare of another. Parallel with these, although
differing from them, are those things by which men wound the hearts of those whom they
should shield. Your anger may sting venomously. Your jealousy may do a mischief in one short
hour that your whole life cannot repair. Your cruel pride may do a whole age’s work in a day.
You cannot take back the injuries that you have done to those whose hearts lie throbbing next to
yours. All! when winter has frozen my heliotropes, it makes no difference that the next morning
thaws them out. There lie the heliotropes—a black, noisome heap; and it is possible for you to
chill a tender nature so that no thawing can restore it. You may relent, but frost has been there,
and you cannot bring back freshness and fragrance to the blossom. You cannot sweeten the
embittered heart to which your words have been like scorpions. It is a terrible thing for a man to
have the power of poisoning the hearts of others, and yet carry that power carelessly. (H. W.
Beecher.)
Immoral authors and their poisonous effects
It is a remarkable fact that the poison of the rattlesnake is even secreted after death. Dr. Bell, in
his dissections of the rattlesnakes which have been dead many hours, has found that the poison
continued to be secreted so fast as to require to be dried up occasionally with sponge or rag. The
immoral author, like these rattlesnakes, not only poisons during his lifetime, but after death:
because his books possess the subtle power of secreting the venom to a horrible degree. A moral
sponge is constantly called into requisition to obliterate his poison for many years after he
himself has been dead. (Louis Figuier.)
Their is no fear of God before their eyes.—
Impenitent men destitute of holiness
The text gives us man’s native character. Such he is till the Spirit of God has sanctified him.

I. Many have mistaken the native character of man, from having seen him capable of affections
and deeds that are praiseworthy. We do not deny that there has been seen in men not sanctified.
II. Men have been led to controvert this doctrine because they are not conscious of the wrong
motives by which they are actuated. What the prophet says of the idol maker is more or less true
of all unregenerate men in all ages, “A deceived heart hath turned him aside, that he cannot
deliver his soul, nor say, Is there not a lie in my right hand?” They do not consider it important
to know what their designs are, and have not that familiarity with their hearts that would render
it easy to discover.
III. The doctrine of the text is often controverted to support schemes with which this sentiment
would not compare. The sinner’s entire depravity is a fundamental doctrine on which there can
be built only one, and that the gospel system. Make this doctrine true, and it sweeps away, as
with the besom of destruction, every creed but one from the face of the world. It settles the
question that God may righteously execute His law upon all unregenerate men; that “by deeds of
the law there shall no flesh be justified”; that the doings of unregenerate men are unholy; that an
atonement, such as God has provided, is the only medium through which we can purge our
consciences from dead works to serve the living God.
IV. This doctrine has been controverted through the pride of the human heart. Depravity is a
most degrading doctrine, and entire depravity intolerable, till the heart has been humbled by the
grace of God. There is in apostate men great pride of character. With the promptness with which
we fly the touch of fire does pride resist imputation. Hence inquires the unregenerate man,
Would you deny me the credit of loving my Creator, Preserver, and Benefactor? Do I never obey
His law, or do a deed from motives that please Him? And is there, among my noblest actions of
kindness to men, nothing that amounts to love?
V. I proceed to offer some reasons for esteeming it a very important doctrine.
1. The fact that it is plainly revealed testifies to its importance. God would not have
cumbered His Word with a doctrine of no value.
2. The doctrine of the text is esteemed important, as it is one of the first truths used by the
Spirit of God in awakening and sanctifying sinners.
3. The doctrine of the text is esteemed important, as it lies at the foundation of the whole
gospel scheme. (D. A. Clark.)
SBC, “Every Mouth Stopped.
I. Perhaps some readers are aware of a feeling of disappointment at reaching this result. Not
that they doubt the native depravity of mankind, or the certainty that all men, left to themselves,
will go very far astray from righteousness. But it may be said, ail men were not left to
themselves. God interposed with a holy and awful law. He took one race under His own moral
education. He taught them carefully the way of duty, and did what was possible to fence them in
it and cut off all temptation to wander out of it. Surely the average moral standard was greatly
raised within that sheltered Hebrew commonwealth, and many individual Hebrews succeeded
in leading very virtuous and devout lives "in all the ordinances of the law blameless"! Does it not
sound hard to say that not one of them was good enough to justify his life in the sight of God? Is
this not like confessing that the whole Mosaic system of religious training and moral legislation
was a failure.
II. To put us in a right attitude for judging of this whole matter, it is of the first consequence to
see what the purpose of God was in giving His law at all. You cannot judge whether the Mosaic
law was a failure or not until you know what it was intended to accomplish. Now, the express

teaching of St. Paul is that God did not expect the Jews to attain such a righteousness as would
justify them at the last by their own attempts to keep the Mosaic law. A law is not intended to
give life: it is only intended to regulate life. The law was not meant to lead to righteousness,
because it could not give spiritual life. The law was meant to fill a far humbler office: it brought
us a better knowledge of our sin. Each addition to revealed law widens men’s knowledge of what
is sinful, and pushes forward the frontier of the forbidden a little nearer to that ideal line which
God’s own nature prescribes: "Through the law cometh the knowledge of sin."
J. Oswald Dykes, The Gospel according to St. Paul, p. 66.
BARCLAY, “THE CHRISTLESS WORLD
Rom. 3:9-18
What then? Are we Jews out ahead? By no means. For we have already charged all Jews and Greeks with being
under the power of sin, as it stands written: "There is none righteous, no not one. There is no man of understanding.
There is none who seeks the Lord. All have swerved out of the way, and all together have gone bad. There is none
whose acts are good, not one single one. Their throat is an open tomb. They practise fraud with their tongues. The
poison of asps is under their lips. Their mouths are laden with curses and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed
blood. Destruction and wretchedness are in their ways, and they have not known the way of peace. There is no fear
of God before their eyes."
In the last passage Paul had insisted that, in spite of everything, the Jew had a special position in the economy of
God. Not unnaturally the Jewish objector then asks if that means that the Jews are out ahead of other peoples. Paul's
answer is that Jew and Gentile alike, so long as they are without Christ, are under the dominion of sin. The Greek
phrase that he uses for under sin is very suggestive, hupo hamartian. In this sense hupo means in the power of, under
the authority of. In Matt.8:9 the centurion says: "I have soldiers hupo emauton, under me." That is, I have soldiers
under my command. A schoolboy is hupo paidagogon, under the direction of the slave who is in control of him. A
slave is hupo zugon, under the yoke of his master. In the Christless state a man is under the control of sin, and
helpless to escape from it.
There is one other interesting word in this passage. It is the word in Rom. 3:12 which we have translated. "They
have gone bad." The word is achreioo, which literally means to render useless. One of its uses is of milk that has
gone sour. Human nature without Christ is a soured and useless thing.
We see Paul doing here what Jewish Rabbis customarily did. In Rom. 3:10-18 he has strung together a collection of
Old Testament texts. He is not quoting accurately, because he is quoting from memory, but he includes quotations
from Ps. 14:1-3; Ps. 5:9; Ps. 140:3; Ps. 10:7; Isa. 59:7-8; Ps. 36:1. It was a very common method of Rabbinic
preaching to string texts together like this. It was called charaz (see charuwz), which literally means stringing pearls.
It is a terrible description of human nature in its Christless state. Vaughan has pointed out that these Old Testament
quotations describe three things. (i) A character whose characteristics are ignorance, indifference, crookedness and
unprofitableness. (ii) A tongue whose notes are destructive, deceitful, malignant. (iii) A conduct whose marks are
oppression, injuriousness, implacability. These things are the result of disregard of God.
No one saw so clearly the evil of human nature as Paul did; but it must always be noted that the evil of human nature
was to him, not a call to hopelessness, but a challenge to hope. When we say that Paul believed in original sin and
the depravity of human nature, we must never take that to mean that he despaired of human nature or looked on it
with cynical contempt. Once, when William Jay of Bath was an old man, he said: "My memory is failing, but there
are two things that I never forget--that I am a great sinner and that Jesus Christ is a great Saviour."
Paul never underrated the sin of man and he never underrated the redeeming power of Jesus Christ. Once, when he
was a young man, William Roby, the great Lancashire Independent, was preaching at Malvern. His lack of success
drove him to despair, and he wished to leave the work. Then came a seasonable reproof from a certain Mr Moody,
who asked him, "Are they, then, too bad to be saved?" The challenge sent William Roby back to his work. Paul
believed men without Christ to be bad, but he never believed them too bad to be saved. He was confident that what
Christ had done for him Christ could do for any man.
10 As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one;

?tW ed5v,As it is written - The apostle is reasoning with Jews; and he proceeds to show
from their own Scriptures, that what he had affirmed was true. The point to be proved was, that
the Jews, in the matter of justification, had no advantage or preference over the Gentiles; that
the Jew had failed to keep the Law which had been given him, as the Gentile had failed to keep
the Law which had been given him; and that both, therefore, were equally dependent on the
mercy of God, incapable of being justified and saved by their works. To show this, the apostle
adduces texts to show what was the character of the Jewish people; or to show that according to
their own Scriptures, they were sinners no less than the Gentiles. The point, then, is to prove the
depravity of the Jews, not that of universal depravity. The interpretation should be confined to
the bearing of the passages on the Jews, and the quotations should not be adduced as directly
proving the doctrine of universal depravity. In a certain sense, which will be stated soon, they
may be adduced as bearing on that subject. But their direct reference is to the Jewish nation.
The passages which follow, are taken from various parts of the Old Testament. The design of this
is to show, that this characteristic of sin was not confined to any particular period of the Jewish
history, but pertained to them as a people; that it had characterised them throughout their
existence as a nation. Most of the passages are quoted in the language of the Septuagint. The
quotation in Rom_3:10-12, is from Psa_14:1-3; and from Psa_53:1-3. Psa_53:1-6 is the same as
Psa_14:1-7, with some slight variations.
(Yet if we consult Psa_14:1-7 and Psa_53:1-6, from which the quotations in Rom_3:10-12 are
taken, we shall be constrained to admit that their original application is nothing short of
universal. The Lord is represented as looking down from heaven, (not upon the Jewish people
only, but upon the “children of men” at large, “to see if there were any that did understand and
seek God);” and declaring, as the result of his unerring scrutiny, “there is “none” that doeth
good, no, not one.”
That the apostle applies the passages to the case of the Jews is admitted, yet it is evident more
is contained in them than the single proof of Jewish depravity. They go all the length of proving
the depravity of mankind, and are cited expressly with this view. “We have before proved both
Jews and Gentiles,” says Paul in Rom_3:9, “that they are all under sin.” Immediately on this, the
quotations in question are introduced with the usual formula, “as it is written,” etc. Now since
the apostle adduces his Scripture proofs, to establish the doctrine that both Jews and Gentiles
are all under sin,” we cannot reasonably decide against him by confining their application to the
Jews only.
In Rom_3:19 Paul brings his argument to bear directly on the Jews. That they might not elude
his aim, by interpreting the universal expressions he had introduced, of all the pagan only,
leaving themselves favorably excepted; he reminds them that” whatsoever things the law saith, it
saith to them that were under it.” Not contented with having placed them alongside of the
Gentiles in Rom_3:9; by this second application of the general doctrine of human depravity, to
their particular case, he renders escape or evasion impossible. The scope of the whole passage
then, is, that all people are depraved, and that the Jews form no exception. This view is further
strengthened by the apostle’s conclusion in Rom_3:20. “Therefore, by the deeds of the law there
shall no flesh be justified in his (God’s) sight.”
“If the words,” says President Edwards, “which the apostle uses, do not most fully and
determinately signify an universality, no words ever used in the Bible are sufficient to do it. I
might challenge any man to produce any one paragraph in the scriptures, from the beginning to
the end, where there is such a repetition and accumulation of terms, so strongly, and
emphatically, and carefully, to express the most perfect and absolute universality, or any place
to be compared to it.” - “Edwards on Original Sin, - Haldane’s Commentary.”
There is none righteous - The Hebrew Psa_14:1 is, there is none that doeth good. The

Septuagint has the same. The apostle quotes according to the sense of the passage. The design of
the apostle is to show that none could be justified by the Law. He uses an expression, therefore,
which is exactly conformable to his argument, and which accords in meaning with the Hebrew,
“there is none just,” δίκαιος dikaios.
No, not one - This is not in the Hebrew, but is in the Septuagint. It is a strong universal
expression, denoting the state of almost universal corruption which existed in the time of the
psalmist. The expression should not be interpreted to mean that there was not literally “one
pious man” in the nation; but that the characteristic of the nation was, at that time, that it was
exceedingly corrupt. Instead of being righteous, as the Jew claimed, because they were Jews, the
testimony of their own Scriptures was, that they were universally wicked.
(The design of the apostle, however, is not to prove that there were few or none pious. He is
treating of the impossibility of justification by works, and alleges in proof that, according to the
judgment of God in the Psa_14:1 Psalm, there were none righteous, etc., in regard to their
natural estate, or the condition in which man is, previous to his being justified. In this condition,
all are deficient in righteousness, and have nothing to commend them to the divine favor. What
people may afterward become by grace is another question, on which the apostle does not, in
this place, enter. Whatever number of pious people, therefore, there might be in various places
of the world, the argument of the apostle is not in the least affected. It will hold good even in the
millennium!)
CLARKE, “As it is written - See
Psa_14:1-3; from which this and the two following verses
are taken.
There is none righteous - This is true, not only of the Jews, but of the Gentiles; of every
soul of man, considered in his natural and practical state, previously to his receiving the mercy
of our Lord Jesus Christ. There is no righteous principle in them, and, consequently, no
righteous act can be expected from them; see on Rom_3:12 (note). God himself is represented as
looking down from heaven to see if there were any that feared and sought after him; and yet he,
who cannot be deceived, could find none! And therefore we may safely conclude there was none
to be found.
GILL, “As it is written, there is none righteous, no, not one. The several passages cited
here, and in some following verses, are taken out of the Psalms and Isaiah; and are brought to
prove, not only that the Jews are no better than the Gentiles, being equally corrupt and
depraved as they; but also to show the corrupt state and condition of mankind in general: and
the words are not always literally expressed, but the sense is attended to, as in this passage; for
in the original text of
Psa_14:1, it is, "there is none that doth good"; from whence the apostle
rightly infers, "there is none righteous"; for he that does not do good, is not righteous; and
therefore if there is none on earth that does good and does not sin, there is none righteous upon
earth, "no, not one" single person. The Jews allegorizing that passage in Gen_19:31, "there is not
a man in the earth to come into us", remark (u) on it thus,
"Urab qydu vya Nya, "there is not a righteous man in the earth"; and there is not a man that
rules over his imagination.''
There is none righteous as Adam was, in a state of innocence; for all have sinned, and are filled

with unrighteousness, and are enemies to righteousness; none are righteous by their obedience
to the law of works; nor are there any righteous in the sight of God, upon the foot of their own
righteousness, however they may appear in their own eyes, and in the sight of others; nor are
any inherently righteous, for there is none without sin, sanctification is imperfect; nor is it,
either in whole or in part, a saint's justifying righteousness; indeed there is none righteous, no,
not one, but those who are justified by the righteousness of Christ imputed to them.
'jsJtE <Paul, having removed these objections, next revives his assertion of the general guilt
and corruption of mankind in common, both of Jews and Gentiles,
Rom_3:9-18. “Are we better
than they, we Jews, to whom were committed the oracles of God? Does this recommend us to
God, or will this justify us? No, by no means.” Or, “Are we Christians (Jews and Gentiles) so
much better antecedently than the unbelieving part as to have merited God's grace? Alas! no:
before free grace made the difference, those of us that had been Jews and those that had been
Gentiles were all alike corrupted.” They are all under sin. Under the guilt of sin: under it as
under a sentence; - under it as under a bond, by which they are bound over to eternal ruin and
damnation; - under it as under a burden (Psa_38:4) that will sink them to the lowest hell: we
are guilty before God, Rom_3:19. Under the government and dominion of sin: under it as under
a tyrant and cruel task-master, enslaved to it; - under it as under a yoke; - under the power of it,
sold to work wickedness. And this he had proved,
proētiasametha. It is a law term: We have
charged them with it, and have made good our charge; we have proved the indictment, we have
convicted them by the notorious evidence of the fact. This charge and conviction he here further
illustrates by several scriptures out of the Old Testament, which describe the corrupt depraved
state of all men, till grave restrain or change them; so that herein as in a glass we may all of us
behold our natural face. The
Rom_3:10, Rom_3:11, and Rom_3:12 verses are taken from
Psa_14:1-3, which are repeated as containing a very weighty truth, Psa_53:1-3. The rest that
follows here is found in the Septuagint translation of the 14th Psalm, which some think the
apostle chooses to follow as better known; but I rather think that Paul took these passages from
other places of scripture here referred to, but in later copies of the Septuagint they were all
added in Psa_14:1-7 from this discourse of Paul. It is observable that, to prove the general
corruption of nature, he quotes some scriptures which speak of the particular corruptions of
particular persons, as of Doeg (Psa_140:3), of the Jews (Isa_59:7, Isa_59:8), which shows that
the same sins that are committed by one are in the nature of all. The times of David and Isaiah
were some of the better times, and yet to their days he refers. What is said Psa_14:1-7 is
expressly spoken of all the children of men, and that upon a particular view and inspection
made by God himself. The Lord looked down, as upon the old world, Gen_6:5. And this
judgment of God was according to truth. He who, when he himself had made all, looked upon
every thing that he had made, and behold all was very good, now that man had marred all,
looked, and behold all was very bad. Let us take a view of the particulars. Observe,
1. That which is habitual, which is two-fold: -
(1.) An habitual defect of every thing that is good. [1.] There is none righteous, none that has
an honest good principle of virtue, or is governed by such a principle, none that retains any thing
of that image of God, consisting in righteousness, wherein man was created; no, not one;
implying that, if there had been but one, God would have found him out. When all the world was
corrupt, God had his eye upon one righteous Noah. Even those who through grace are justified
and sanctified were none of them righteous by nature. No righteousness is born with us. The
man after God's own heart owns himself conceived in sin. [2.] There is none that
understandeth, Rom_3:11. The fault lies in the corruption of the understanding; that is blinded,
depraved, perverted. Religion and righteousness have so much reason on their side that if
people had but any understanding they would be better and do better. But they do not

understand. Sinners are fools. [3.] None that seeketh after God, that is, none that has any regard
to God, any desire after him. Those may justly be reckoned to have no understanding that do not
seek after God. The carnal mind is so far from seeking after God that really it is enmity against
him. [4.] They are together become unprofitable, Rom_3:12. Those that have forsaken God
soon grow good for nothing, useless burdens of the earth. Those that are in a state of sin are the
most unprofitable creatures under the sun; for it follows, [5.] There is none that doeth good; no,
not a just man upon the earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not, Ecc_7:23. Even in those actions
of sinners that have some goodness in them there is a fundamental error in the principle and
end; so that it may be said, There is none that doeth good. Malum oritur ex quolibet defectu -
Every defect is the source of evil.
(2.) An habitual defection to every thing that is evil: They are all gone out of the way. No
wonder that those miss the right way who do not seek after God, the highest end. God made man
in the way, set him in right, but he hath forsaken it. The corruption of mankind is an apostasy.
(taodh 9v4As it is written, etc. — (
Psa_14:1-3; Psa_53:1-3). These statements of the
Psalmist were indeed suggested by particular manifestations of human depravity occurring
under his own eye; but as this only showed what man, when unrestrained, is in his present
condition, they were quite pertinent to the apostle’s purpose.
gtsFo 9v410.As it is written, etc. He has hitherto used proofs or arguments to convince men of their
iniquity; he now begins to reason from authority; and it is to Christians the strongest kind of proof, when
authority is derived from the only true God. And hence let ecclesiastical teachers learn what their office is;
for since Paul asserts here no truth but what he CONFIRMS
by the sure testimony of Scripture, much
less ought such a thing to be attempted by those, who have no other commission but to preach the gospel,
which they have received through Paul and others.
There is none righteous, etc. The Apostle, who gives the meaning rather than the entire words, seems, in
the first place, before he comes to particulars, to state generally the substance of what the Prophet declares
to be in man, and that is — that none is righteous;
(98) he afterwards particularly enumerates the effects or
fruits of this unrighteousness.
(98)
Psa_14:1. The Hebrew is, “ is none that doeth good;” and the Septuagint, “ is none doing kindness,
(
χρηστότητα), there is not even one, ( ὀυκ ἔστιν ἕως ἑνός)” So that the Apostle QUOTES
the meaning,
not the words.
The eleventh verse (Rom_3:11) is from the same Psalm; the Hebrew, with which the Septuagint AGREE,
except that there is the disjunctive
ἢ between the participles, is the following, — “ there is any one who
understands, who seeks after God.” — Ed.

dJe!at 9v?JcuyuvMCvIAvAIuvyMBcHuAOC9vIAHvuTuIvAIu:?vHWAVvnE31,v oFI
Isn't that an amazing statement? Just think of all the nice people that you know. They may not be Christians,
but they are nice people .. good neighbors, kind and gracious people who speak lovingly. God, looking at

them, says, "There's not one among them that is righteous, not even one." I think the total depravity of the
human heart is revealed by the fact that when we read this kind of statement, "There is no one righteous, not
even one," we mentally add, "except me." Right?
"there is no one who understands," {Rom 3:11av oFI
Think of all the people today who are searching to understand the mystery of life. All over the world, in
temples, schools, universities, in the jungles, before idols, people are searching to find the answer to the
mystery of man: Why are we like we are? And in all that vast array of searchers, God says there is not one
who understands, not one.
vvvvvv?IAvAIuvCuNy)cuCvmAyviAD8?vHWAVvnE33,v oFI
What a claim this is! Here are all these religious people going to temples, going through various procedures,
observing rituals, flocking to churches, filling up worship areas all over the world. What are they looking for?
We would say they are looking for God, but God does not say so. He says there is no one searching for God.
They are looking for a god, not the God. They are not looking for the God of truth and justice, who is behind
all things.
gktWsedvdoaeh 9v4
THE EXTENT OF MAN’S DEPRAVITY
Rom_3:10*20. It is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: there is none that understandeth, there is
none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there
is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is un open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used
deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: their feet are swift
to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known: there is
no fear of God before their eyes. Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who
are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight.
THE Scriptures are the only and infallible source of divine knowledge. To them the Apostles CONTINUALLY
refer in support of their doctrines. No subject is capable of more ample proof from them than that before
us. St. Paul is shewing that all mankind are guilty and depraved. In confirmation of this he cites many
passages from the Old Testament [Note: See Psa_14:1*3.Pro_1:16; Pro_1:18. Isa_59:7*8.]. From these, as
stated and improved in the text, we are led to consider,
I. The representation which the Scripture gives of our state—
The testimonies here adduced, declare, that the most lamentable depravity pervades,
1. All ranks and orders of men—
“There is none righteous, no, not one [Note: The Apostle has so arranged his quotations as to form a
beautiful climax, every subsequent passage affirming more than that which precedes it.]”—
[Righteousness is a conformity of heart and life to the law of God. Where is the man on earth that possesses

it by nature? Where is the man whose deviations from this standard have not been innumerable?]
“There is none that understandeth”—
[The natural man has no discernment of spiritual things [Note: 1Co_2:14.]: his practical judgment is in favour
of sin and the world.]
“There is none that seeketh after God”—
[The things of time and sense are diligently pursued; but who ever cultivates divine knowledge, or seriously
inquires after God [Note: Job_35:10.]?]
“All are gone out of the way”—
[Men universally prefer the way of self*righteousness to that of faith in Christ, and that of sin and self*
indulgence to holiness and self*denial. No one that sees them would imagine that they really intended to
tread in the steps of Christ and his Apostles.]
“They are together become unprofitable”—
[God has formed us for his own glory, and each other’s good: but unregenerate men never attempt to
answer these ends of their creation [Note: They may do good to the bodies of men; but never shew any real
solicitude about their souls. Indeed, how should they, when they care not for their own souls?]: hence they
are justly compared to things worthless and vile [Note:Luk_14:34*35
and Joh_15:6.].]
“There is none that doeth good, no, not one”—
[Nothing is really good, which is not so in its principle, rule, and end [Note: The fear and love of God are the
principle, the Scriptures the rule, and God’s glory the end of Christian obedience,1Co_10:31.]. But where is
the action of any natural man that will stand this test?]
2. All the faculties and powers of men—
[Nothing is more offensive than an open sepulchre [Note: Mat_23:27.]; or more venomous than an asp; yet
both the one and the other fitly represent the effusions of a carnal heart: “Out of the abundance of the heart
the mouth will speak:” deceit, calumny, invective, yea, in many instances, the most horrible oaths and
execrations will PROCEED
from it [Note: No less than four expressions, and those exceeding strong, are
sued to declare the evils of the tongue.]. Hence that awful description of the human tongue [Note: Jam_3:6.]
— From words
we are ready also to proceed to actions, yea, even the most cruel and atrocious. Who that

sees with what readiness nations engage in war, will question the declaration in the text? Hazael revolted at
the idea of murder, when warned of his readiness to commit it; yet notwithstanding his present feelings, how
“swift
were his feet to shed blood [Note: 2Ki_8:12*13. with ib. VER
. 15 and 13:7.]!” How many at this day
are impelled by shame even to destroy their own offspring! How frequently do men engage in duels
on ACCOUNT of the slightest injury or insult! And in how many instances might we ourselves, when
irritated and inflamed, have committed murder in an unguarded moment, exactly as others have done, who
in a cooler hour would have shuddered at the thought! The instance of David, who, though “a man after
God’s own heart,” murdered Uriah, and many others with him, to conceal his shame, is sufficient of itself to
shew us what the best of men might commit, if left to themselves [Note: 2Sa_11:14*17.]. Well we
may APPLY to this subject that humiliating language of the prophet [Note: Isa_1:5*6.]— Thus, God
himself being witness, instead of walking in “paths of peace” and safety, we all by nature prefer the “ways
which bring destruction and misery” both on ourselves and all around us [Note: Psa_36:1.]. The whole of our
state is properly summed up in this, that “there is no fear of God before our eyes;” so entirely are our
understandings blinded, and our hearts alienated from him, by means of our innate depravity [Note: ver. 16
and 17. relate primarily to the evil which men do to others, though they may include what they do to
themselves. See Isa_59:7*8.].]
This humiliating view of our state should lead us to consider,
II. The inferences to be deduced from it—
Those which the Apostle suggests in the text will suffice for our attention at this time:
1. We are all “guilty before God”—
[It seems inconceivable to many, that they should really be obnoxious to everlasting misery in hell: and they
will plead their own cause with zeal and eloquence: if they concede it with respect to some more heinous
transgressors, they will deny it in reference to themselves. But God has taken care that “every
mouth should
be stopped.” It is not possible to express the UNIVERSALITY
of men’s wickedness more strongly than it
is expressed in the words before us [Note: “None, no, not one;” “none; none; none, no, not one;” “all; all
together;” “every mouth;” even “all the world.” Can any, after this, fancy himself an exception?]. All then must
“become guilty before God,” and acknowledge their desert of his wrath and indignation; they must feel their
desert of condemnation, as much as a man that has been condemned for parricide feels the justice of the
sentence which is pronounced against him. O that we might all be brought to such unfeigned contrition! We
should then be “not far from the kingdom of God [Note: Psa_51:17.].”]
2. We can never be justified by any works of our own—
[“We know
that what the law saith, it saith unto them that are under the law.” Now the law saith, “Do this and

live: transgress it and thou shall die [Note: Rom_10:5. Gal_3:10.];” but it speaks not one word about
mitigating its demands to the weak, however weak, or its penalties to the guilty, however small the measure
of their guilt. How then can any man “be justified by the works of the law?” Can a man be guilty, and not
guilty? or can he be condemned by the law, and yet justified by it at the same time, and in the same
respects? Let all hope then, and all thought, of justification by the law be put away from for us ever. God has
provided a better way for our justification, namely, through the blood and righteousness of his dear Son
[Note: Rom_3:21*22.]: and to lead us into that way was the intention of the Apostle in citing the passages
that have already been considered. Let us improve his humiliating representation for this salutary end; so
shall we be “justified freely by grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus [Note: Rom_3:24.].”]
11 there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God.
puTgs (PκThere is none that understandeth - In the Hebrew
Psa_14:2, God is
represented as looking down from heaven to see, that is, to make investigation, whether there
were any that understood or sought after him. This circumstance gives not only high poetic
beauty to the passage, but deep solemnity and awfulness. God, the searcher of hearts, is
represented as making investigation on this very point. He looks down from heaven for this very
purpose, to ascertain whether there were any righteous. In the Hebrew it is not asserted, though
it is clearly and strongly implied, that none such were found. That fact the apostle “states.” If, as
the result of such an investigation, none were found; if God did not specify that there were any
such; then it follows that there were none. For none could escape the notice of his eye; and if
there had been any, the benevolence of his heart would have led him to record it. To understand
is used in the sense of being wise; or of having such a state of moral feeling as to dispose them to
serve and obey God. The word is often used in the Bible, not to denote a mere intellectual
operation of the mind, but the state of the heart inclining the mind to obey and worship God;
Psa_107:43; Psa_119:27, Psa_119:100; Pro_5:5; Isa_6:10; “Lest they should understand with
their heart,” etc.
That seeketh after God - That endeavors to know and do his will, and to be acquainted
with his character. A disposition not to seek after God, that is, to neglect and forget him, is one
of the most decided proofs of depravity. A righteous man counts it his highest privilege and
honor to know God, and to understand his will. A man can indulge in wickedness only by
forgetting God. Hence, a disposition “not” to seek God is full proof of depravity.
GILL, “There is none that understandeth,.... This is rightly concluded, from what the
Psalmist says,
Psa_14:2, "The Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men", on all
the children of men, Jews and Gentiles, "to see if there were any that did understand"; and it
appears, upon this survey of them, there was not one understanding person among them: man
thinks himself a very wise and understanding creature, though he is born a very ignorant one:

true indeed, he has not lost by sin the natural faculty of the understanding, so as to become like
the horse and mule, which are without any; and it must be allowed, that natural men have some
understanding of things natural, civil, and moral; though there is none that understands even
these, as Adam did: but then they have no understanding of things spiritual; no spiritual
knowledge of God; no true sense of themselves, their sin and misery; nor do they truly know the
way of salvation by Christ; nor have they any experience of the work of the Spirit of God upon
their souls; nor any experimental knowledge of the doctrines of the Gospel: no man can
understand these of himself, by the mere strength of reason, and light of nature; nor can even a
spiritual man fully understand them in this life; in consequence of this account and character of
men it follows, that
there is none that seeketh after God; that worships him in Spirit and in truth, or prays to
him with the Spirit, and with the understanding; who seek him chiefly, and in the first place,
with their whole hearts, earnestly, diligently, and constantly; who seek him in Christ, and under
the assistance of the Spirit; who seek after the knowledge of God in Christ, communion with him
through the Mediator, or his honour and glory.
bt?(r Isα11.The first effect is, that there is none that understands: and then this ignorance is
immediately proved, for they seek not God; for empty is the man in whom there is not the knowledge of God,
whatever other learning he may possess; yea, the sciences and the arts, which in themselves are good, are
empty things, when they are without this groundwork.
εn WoIssθTsf;vgsJ;CB;sCws;vνCg:vSIsJ;CB;sCwsgJpΤdpSd:..
(1.) An habitual defect of every thing that is good. [1.] There is none righteous, none that
has an honest good principle of virtue, or is governed by such a principle, none that retains
any thing of that image of God, consisting in righteousness, wherein man was created; no,
not one; implying that, if there had been but one, God would have found him out. When all
the world was corrupt, God had his eye upon one rig;g,p:ws pv;TsnA,.sg;pw,sJ;psg;jp:G;s
grace are justified and sanctified were none of theEsjCG;g,p:wsνOs.vg:j,Ts psjCG;g,p:w.,wws
is born with us. The man after God's own heart owns himself conceived in sin. [2.] There is
none that understandeth, v. 11. The fault lies in the corruption of the understanding; that is
blinded, depraved, perverted. Religion and righteousness have so much reason on their side
that if people had but any understanding they would be better and do better. But they do
.pgs:.F,jwgv.FTsiC..,jwsvj,sdppSwTs'eTRs p.,sg;vgsweeketh after God, that is,none that has
any regard to God, any desire after him. Those may justly be reckoned to have no
understanding that do not seek after God. The carnal mind is so far from seeking after God
that really it is enmity against him. [4.] They are together become unprofitable, v. 12. Those
that have forsaken God soon grow good for nothing, useless burdens of the earth. Those
that are in a state of sin are the most unprofitable creatures under the sun; for it follows,
[5.] There is none that doeth good; no, not a just man upon the earth, that doeth good, and
sinneth not, Eccl. vii. 23. Even in those actions of sinners that have some goodness in them
there is a fundamental error in the principle and end; so that it may be said, There is none
that doeth good. Malum oritur ex quolibet defectu..Every defect is the source of evil.

(2.) An habitual defection to every thing that is evh68וה3,aוos,וo66וכp",וpחeוpwוe3,וdoa.ולpו
wonder that those miss the right way who do not seek after God, the highest end. God made
man in the way, set him in right, but he hath forsaken it. The corruption of mankind is an
apostasy. That which is actual. And what good can be expected from such a degenerate
race? He instances,
12 All have turned away, they have together become
worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one." [
3]
?tW ed5v,They have all gone out of the way - They have “declined” from the true path of
piety and virtue.
They are together - They have at the same time; or they have equally become unprofitable.
They are as one; they are joined, or united in this declension. The expression denotes union, or
similarity.
Become unprofitable - This word in Hebrew means to become “putrid” and “offensive,”
like fruit that is spoiled. In Arabic, it is applied to “milk” that becomes sour. Applied to moral
subjects, it means to become corrupt and useless. They are of no value in regard to works of
righteousness.
There is none ... - This is taken literally from the Hebrew.
CLARKE, “They are all gone out of the way -
qH;0WbRWiW\jk;H;, they have all diverged from
the right way, they have either abandoned or corrupted the worship of God: the Jews, in
forsaking the law and the prophets, and the Gentiles, in acting contrary to the law which God
had written on their hearts. And the departure of both from the truth proves the evil propensity
of human nature in general.
They are together become unprofitable - ηχρειωθησαν. They are useless, good for
nothing; or, as the Hebrew has it, וחלאנ neelachu, they are putrid: he views the whole mass of
mankind as slain and thrown together, to putrefy in heaps. This is what is termed the corruption
of human nature; they are infected and infectious. What need of the mercy of God to save from
such a state of degeneracy!
There is none that doeth good - In Rom_3:10 it is said, There is none righteous; here,
There is none that doeth good: the first may refer to the want of a righteous principle; the
second, to the necessary consequence of the absence of such a principle. If there be no
righteousness within, there will be no acts of goodness without.
GILL, “They are all gone out of the way,.... In
Psa_14:3; it is said, "they are all gone aside";
as persons in debt: man had a considerable stock of righteousness, holiness, knowledge, &c. but

he has run through all, has contracted large and numerous debts, has been obliged to hide
himself, has been used as a bankrupt, and turned out of house and home: Christ indeed has
undertook to pay, and he has paid all the debts of his people; and has put them into a better
state than ever Adam was in: in Psa_53:3, it is rendered, "everyone of them is gone back"; that
is, from God; from his commands, and from their former state and condition: here the phrase is
rendered by the apostle, "they are all gone out of the way": that is, out of the way of God and his
precepts, out of the way of holiness and righteousness, of light and life; into their own ways, the
ways of sin, Satan, and the world of darkness, and of death: so Aben Ezra explains it, "out of the
right way"; Kimchi and Ben Melech paraphrase it, "out of the good way: and so"
they are together become unprofitable; the word WvO t4uW!oWPsa_14:3WSoRWPsa_53:3CW!yW
TCSoyXSTHRuWITMHUWSCHW9HiNDHW’!XTMUICWmM!iMW)8WQ9HoWrfCSW!oTHCACHTyW9UWותחשנuWITMHUWSCHWiNCCYATICWSoRW)8W
LNXNDNoWISCiM!W9UW vl l WvB6J4uWITMHUWSCHWTYCoHRWTNWiNCCYAT!NoICWTMHWDHTSAMNCW!yWTS7HoW’CNDWyT!o7!oFW
’XHyMuWmM!iMW!yWTS!oTHRWSoRWiNCCYATHRuWSoRWyNWFNNRW’NCWoNTM!oFuWMHoiHWMHCHWCHoRHCHRWIYoACN’!TS9XHICW’NCWyNW
DHoW9H!oFWiNCCYATHRW9UWy!ouWSCHWN’WoNWYyHuWyHC5!iHuWSoRWSR5SoTSFHWTNWENRuWTNWDHouWNCWTNWTMHDyHX5HyCW9YTuW
NoWTMHWiNoTCSCUuWoSYyHNYyWTNWENRuWSoRWTNWSXXWTMSTWSCHWFNNRuWSoRWMYCT’YXWTNWTMHDyHX5HyWSoRWNTMHCyfW’NCW
TMHCHW!yWoNoHWTMSTWRNHyWFNNRuWoNuWoNTWNoHTMHCHW!yWoNoHWTMSTWRNHyWFNNRuWoNuWoNTWNoHTMHCHW!yWoNoHWTMSTWRNHyWFNNRuWoNuWoNTWNoHTMHCHW!yWoNoHWTMSTWRNHyWFNNRuWoNuWoNTWNoHCWSoRWTMHCH’NCHWDYyTW9HWYoACN’!TS9XH8WHMHCHW!yWoNoHWTMSTWiSoWRNW
FNNRW!oWSWyA!C!TYSXWDSooHCuWm!TMNYTWTMHWFCSiHWN’WENRuWyTCHoFTMW’CNDWPMC!yTuWSoRWTMHWSyy!yTSoiHWN’WTMHW
LA!C!TCWSoRWTMHCHW!yWoNTWH5HoWSWyA!C!TYSXWDSouWTMSTWiSoWRNWFNNRWAHC’HiTXUuWSoRWm!TMNYTWy!o8
gtsFo 9v412.It is added, (99) There is no one who doeth kindness By this we are to understand, that
they had put off every feeling of humanity. For as the best bond of mutual concord among us is the
knowledge of God, (as he is the common Father of all, he wonderfully unites us, and without him there is
nothing but disunion,) so inhumanity commonly follows where there is ignorance of God, as every one, when
he despises others, loves and seeks his own good.
(99)
This verse is literally the Septuagint, and as to meaning, a CORRECT
version of the Hebrew. “ have
gone out of the way
— πάντες ἐξέκλιναν” “ in Hebrew רס לכה, “ whole (or every one) has turned aside,” or
revolted, or apostatized. Then, “ have become unprofitable” or useless, is וחלאנ, “ are become putrid,” or
Corrupted, like putrified fruit or meat, therefore useless, not fit for what they were designed — to serve God
and to PROMOTE
their own and the good of others. Idolatry was evidently this putrescence. — Ed.
STEDMAN, “That could hardly be made any clearer. There is no one who does good, not even
one. Do you struggle with this? Then imagine that someone has invented a camera that records
thoughts. Imagine that at a Sunday morning service, where all you fine-looking, moral, clean-
living, decent people come, we would let you pass through a security section like they do at the
airport and all your thoughts would be recorded. During the service, the camera is scanning,
picking up your thoughts --

What you thought when you sat down, What you thought when the person next to you sat down,
What you were thinking when we sang the hymn, and What you were thinking when I led in
prayer. Then we announce that the next Sunday, instead of the regular service, we would hold a
screening of the film from that camera. I wonder how many would show up?
But this is the stark revelation from Scripture of what God sees when he looks at the human race.
There is no one who does good, not even one. Then he details why.
13 "Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice
deceit." [
4] "The poison of vipers is on their lips." [5]
?tW ed5v,Their throat ... - This expression is taken from Psa_5:9, literally from the
Septuagint. The design of the psalm is to reprove those who were false, traitorous, slanderous,
etc. Psa_5:6. The psalmist has the sin of deceit, and falsehood, and slander particularly in his
eye. The expressions here are to be interpreted in accordance with that. The sentiment here may
be, as the grave is ever open to receive all into it, that is, into destruction, so the mouth or the
throat of the slanderer is ever open to swallow up the peace and happiness of all. Or it may
mean, as from an open sepulchre there proceeds an offensive and pestilential vapor, so from the
mouths of slanderous persons there proceed noisome and ruinous words. “(Stuart.)” I think the
connection demands the former interpretation.
With their tongues ... - In their conversation, their promises, etc., they have been false,
treacherous, and unfaithful.
The poison of asps - This is taken literally from the Septuagint of Psa_140:3. The asp, or
adder, is a species of serpent whose poison is of such active operation that it kills almost the
instant that it penetrates, and that without remedy. It is small, and commonly lies concealed,
often in the “sand” in a road, and strikes the traveler before he sees it. It is found chiefly in Egypt
and Lybia. It is said by ancient writers that the celebrated Cleopatra, rather than be carried a
captive to Rome by Augustus, suffered an asp to bite her in the arm, by which she soon died. The
precise species of serpent which is here meant by the psalmist, however, cannot be ascertained.
All that is necessary to understand the passage is, that it refers to a serpent whose bite was
deadly, and rapid in its execution.
Is under their lips - The poison of the serpent is contained in a small bag which is
concealed at the root of the tooth. When the tooth is struck into the flesh, the poison is pressed
out, through a small hole in the tooth, into the wound. Whether the psalmist was acquainted
with that fact, or referred to it, cannot be known: his words do not of necessity imply it. The
sentiment is, that as the poison of the asp is rapid, certain, spreading quickly through the
system, and producing death; so the words of the slanderer are deadly, pestiferous, quickly
destroying the reputation and happiness of man. They are as subtle, as insinuating, and as
deadly to the reputation, as the poison of the adder is to the body. Wicked people in the Bible are
often compared to serpents; Mat_23:33; Gen_49:17.

CLARKE, “Their throat is an open sepulchre - This and all the following verses to the end
of the 18th are found in the Septuagint, but not in the Hebrew text; and it is most evident that it
was from this version that the apostle quoted, as the verses cannot be found in any other place
with so near an approximation to the apostle’s meaning and words. The verses in question,
however, are not found in the Alexandrian MS. But they exist in the Vulgate, the Ethiopic, and
the Arabic. As the most ancient copies of the Septuagint do not contain these verses, some
contend that the apostle has quoted them from different parts of Scripture; and later
transcribers of the Septuagint, finding that the 10th, 11th, and 12th, verses were quoted from the
xivth Psalm, imagined that the rest were found originally there too, and so incorporated them in
their copies, from the apostle’s text.
Their throat is an open sepulchre - By their malicious and wicked words they bury, as it were,
the reputation of all men. The whole of this verse appears to belong to their habit of lying,
defamation, slandering, etc., by which they wounded, blasted, and poisoned the reputation of
others.
GILL, “Their throat is an open sepulchre,.... The several vices of the instruments of
speech are here, and in the following verse, exposed: "the throat" is said to "be an open
sepulchre", as in
Psa_5:9, so called, for its voracity and insatiableness; both as an instrument of
speech, for the words of the wicked are devouring ones; and as an instrument of swallowing, and
so may denote the sinner's eager desire after sin, the delight and pleasure he takes in it, the
abundance of it he takes in, and his insatiable greediness for it; likewise for its filthy stench, the
communication of evil men being corrupt; and because, as by an open grave, persons may fall
unawares to their hurt, so the evil communications of wicked men, as they corrupt good
manners, are dangerous and hurtful: R. Aben Ezra explains it by MEYRS mAeRnDddtwDyvtRwtrvs.GvDaIneR
asRr.wwtIRwtyviUR
fDviRvitDsRvaIV.trRvit2Riy4tR.rtwRwtGtDvfDviRvitDsRvaIV.trRvit2Riy4tR.rtwRwtGtDvfDviRvitDsRvaIV.trRvit2Riy4tR.rtwRwtGtDvfDviRvitDsRvaIV.trRvit2Riy4tR.rtwRwtGtDv8RfiDGiRdy2RwtrDVIRvitRrDIRapRp(yvvts2eRpasRvitRfaswrRDIRPsa_5:98R
vitRo(yGtRstptsstwRvaeRysteRnvit2Rp(yvvtsRfDviRvitDsRvaIV.tn8RtDvitsR6awRasRdtIeRvitdrt(4trRasRavitsreRvitDsR
osDIGtrRasRvitDsRItDVi,a.s8RpasRvitstRystRp(yvvtstsrRDIRviDIVrRryGstwRyIwRGD4D(eRvitstRystRrt(pnp(yvvtstsreRGa.svR
p(yvvtstsreRyIwRp(yvvtsDIVRostyGitsreRyIwRy((Ry,adDIy,(tRyIwRdDrGiDt4a.r8RasRvitRoisyrtRdy2RwtrDVIRvitRrDIR
apR(2DIVeRtDvitsRoa(DvDGy((2eRappDGDa.r(2eRotsIDGDa.r(2eRyIwRst(DVDa.r(28RyIwRDIRviDrR(yvvtsRfy2eRtDvitsRfDviR
strotGvRvaRwaGvsDItRasRosyGvDGtUR
vitRoaDraIRapRyrorRDrR.IwtsRvitDsR(DorvitRoaDraIRapRyrorRDrR.IwtsRvitDsR(DorvitRoaDraIRapRyrorRDrR.IwtsRvitDsR(DorvitRoaDraIRapRyrorRDrR.IwtsRvitDsR(Dor8RasRyrRDIRPsa_140:3eRnywwtsraRoaDraIRDrR.IwtsRvitDsR(Dorn.R{itRyroRDrR,.vR
yRrdy((RGstyv.steRyIwRraRDrRvitRvaIV.teRJam_3:5eR,.vRvitstRDrRyRfas(wRapRdDrGiDtpRDIRDveRrDVIDpDtwR,2RoaDraI8R
fiDGieRyrRviyveRDrR(yvtIvRyIwRrtGstveRDrR.IwtsRDv8RyIwRyrRviyvRrv.otpDtrRyIwR5D((rRDIrtIrD,(2eRraRyIRt4D(RvaIV.tR
watreRyIwRviyvRDIRyRwtyw(2RyIwRDIG.sy,(tRdyIItsURapvtIvDdtrRvitR}tfrRroty5RapRvitRt4D(RDdyVDIyvDaIeRasR
Gass.ovDaIRapRIyv.stRtIvtsDIVRDIvaRotsraIreRyIwRaotsyvDIVRDIRvitdeRRm )gYRm3Ag nyrRoaDraIRDIRyIRyIVs2R
rtsotIvnR(w).R

(taodh 9v4Their, etc. — From generals, the apostle here comes to particulars, culling from
different parts of Scripture passages which speak of depravity as it affects the different members
of the body; as if to show more affectingly how “from the sole of the foot even to the head there
is no soundness” in us.
throat is an open sepulchre — (Psa_5:9); that is, “What proceeds out of their heart, and
finds vent in speech and action through the throat, is like the pestilential breath of an open
grave.”
with their tongues they have used deceit — (Psa_5:9); that is, “That tongue which is
man’s glory (Psa_16:9; Psa_57:8) is prostituted to the purposes of deception.”
the poison of asps is under their lips — (Psa_140:3): that is, “Those lips which should
‘drop as an honeycomb,’ and ‘feed many,’ and ‘give thanks unto His name’ (Son_4:11;
Pro_10:21; Heb_13:15), are employed to secrete and to dart deadly poison.”
gtsFo 9v413.It is further added, Their throat is an OPEN grave; (100) that is, a gulf
to swallow up men. It is more than if he had said, that they were devourers
( ἀνθρωποφάγους — men*eaters;) for it is an intimation of extreme barbarity, when the
throat is said to be so great a gulf, that it is sufficient to swallow down and devour men
whole and entire. Theirtongues are deceitful, and, the poison of asps is under their
lips, import the same thing,

figurative language different from [Calvin ] : “ from the sepulchre,” he says, “ forth an
offensive and pestilential vapor; so from the mouths of slanderous persons issue
noisome and pestilential words. Their words are like poison, they utter the poisonous
breath of slander.” — Ed.
STEDMAN, “This covers the whole realm of the speech. It begins deep down in the throat, it
comes then to the tongue, then the lips, and then the whole mouth. It moves from the inward to
the outward. What do you find? Deep down, Paul says, God sees an open grave with a stinking,
rotten corpse and a horrible stench coming up from it that reveals itself, ultimately, in vulgarity.
Do you ever wonder why children love toilet talk? Kids especially like to talk toilet talk. Why?
Why do adults like words with double meanings? You hear them on television all the time. What
is down in the heart comes out in the speech -- not only vulgarity, but hypocrisy.
"Their tongues practice deceit." Those little white lies, the way we erect facades, the way we
claim to feel one way when we actually feel another; we think all this deceit is harmless and
unnoticed. But God sees it.

"The poison of vipers is on their lips." This is a picture of the tongue used to slander, to plant
poison in another person's heart -- the put-down, the sharp, caustic words, the sarcasm that cuts
someone off and depersonalizes another being. We are all guilty. This is what is inside, and this
is what God sees with the realism of his eye.
"Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness." If you do not believe that, just step out on the
street and hit the first fellow that comes by right on the mouth and see what comes out -- cursing
and bitterness! Cursing is blaming God; that is profanity. Bitterness is reproaching God because
of the way he has run your life. This is what we hear all the time, even from Christians. We hear
complaints about your circumstances, where God has placed you, and what he is doing with your
life -- cursing and bitterness.
HENRY, “(1.) In their words (v. 13, 14), in three things particularly:-- [1.] Cruelty: Their throat is
an open sepulchre, ready to swallow up the poor and innocent, waiting an opportunity to do
mischief, like the old serpent seeking to devour, whose name is Abaddon and Apollyon, the
destroyer. And when they do not openly avow this cruelty, and vent it publicly, yet they are
underhand intending mischief: the poison of asps is under their lips (Jam. iii. 8), the most
venomous and incurable poison, with which they blast the good name of their neighbour by
reproaches, and aim at his life by false witness. These passages are borrowed from Ps. v. 9 and
cxl. 3. [2.] Cheating: With their tongues they have used deceit. Herein they show themselves the
devil's children, for he is a liar, and the father of lies. They have used it: it intimates that they
make a trade of lying; it is their constant practice, especially belying the ways and people of
God. [3.] Cursing: reflecting upon God, and blaspheming his holy name; wishing evil to their
brethren: Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. This is mentioned as one of the great sins
of the tongue, Jam. iii. 9. But those that thus love cursing shall have enough of it, Ps. cix. 17-19.
How many, who are called Christians, do by these sin evince that they are still under the reign
and dominion of sin, still in the condition that they were born in.
14 "Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness." [
6]
?tW ed5v,Whose mouth - Psa_10:7. The apostle has not quoted this literally, but has given
the sense. David in the psalm is describing his bitter enemies.
Cursing - Reproachful and opprobrious language, such as Shimei used in relation to David;
2Sa_16:5, 2Sa_16:7-8.
Bitterness - In the psalm, deceits. The word “bitterness” is used to denote severity,
harshness, cruelty; reproachful and malicious words.
CLARKE, “Whose mouth is full of cursing, etc. - They never speak but in profane oaths,

blasphemies, and malice.
GILL, “Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. These words are taken from
Psa_10:7, by cursing is meant, cursing of God, which is sometimes internal with the heart, and
sometimes external with the mouth, as here; and of all good men, though without cause, and to
no purpose with respect to the persons they curse, since God has blessed them, and they are
blessed, and greatly to their own detriment, for, in the issue, their curses will be turned against
themselves. There is also a cursing of superiors, as parents, masters, magistrates, kings, and
governors; which is a sore evil, and attended with bad consequences; likewise of themselves, and
their fellow creatures: and "the mouth being full of it", denotes the frequency of the sin; scarce
anything else comes out of it but cursing; which discovers the sad corruption of the heart; "for
out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh", Mat_12:34. By "bitterness" is meant,
either sin in general, which is "an evil and bitter thing", Jer_2:19, in its nature and effects; or
sinful words, such as oaths, curses, imprecations, all wrathful and deceitful words.
(taodh 9v4Whose mouth, etc. — (
Psa_10:7): that is, “That mouth which should be ‘most
sweet’ (Son_5:16), being ‘set on fire of hell’ (Jam_3:6), is filled with burning wrath against those
whom it should only bless.”
gtsFo 9v414.Then he says, that their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness (101) — a vice of an
opposite character to the former; but the meaning is, that they are in every way full of wickedness; for if they
speak fair, they deceive and blend poison with their flatteries; but if they draw forth what they have in their
hearts, bitterness and cursing stream out.
(101)
Psa_10:7. Paul CORRECTS
the order of the words as found in the Septuagint, and gives the
Hebrew more exactly, but retains the word “” by which the Septuagint have rendered תומרמ, which
means deceit, or rather, mischievous deceit. Some think that it ought to be תוררמ, “” but there is no copy in
its favor. — Ed.

15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood;
rtW ed9v4Their feet ... - The quotation in this and the two following verses, is abridged or
condensed from
Isa_59:7-8. The expressions occur in the midst of a description of the character
of the nation in the time of the prophet. The apostle has selected a few expressions out of many,
rather making a reference to the entire passage, than a formal quotation. The expression, “their

feet are swift,” etc., denotes the eagerness of the nation to commit crime, particularly deeds of
injustice and cruelty. They thirsted for the blood of innocence, and hasted to shed it, to gratify
their malice, or to satisfy their vengeance.
CLARKE, “Their feet are swift to shed blood - They make use of every means in their
power to destroy the reputation and lives of the innocent.
GILL, “Their feet are swift to shed blood. The sins of the heart and mouth are before
described, and now the sins of action are taken notice of; for "the feet" are the instruments of
motion and action: and when these are said to be "swift to shed blood", it denotes the readiness
and eagerness of men, to murder innocent creatures; which shows the dreadful malice and
hatred that is in them. The words are cited from
Isa_59:7, and seem to point at the times of
Manasseh, who shed so much innocent blood, as to fill Jerusalem with it from one end to the
other.
(eJgs w+G<Their feet are swift to shed blood — (
Pro_1:16; Isa_59:7): that is, “Those feet,
which should ‘run the way of God’s commandments’ (Psa_119:32), are employed to conduct
men to deeds of darkest crime.”
d.eJat 5v,r33EvI3lv4MvMfivCiiCmvMf4Mvs3yy3l(
"Their feet are swift to shed blood;
ruin and misery mark their paths," {Rom 3:;B.;EGwg,I
Wherever man goes, ruin follows. Do we need any documentation of that today? Why do cities always develop
ghettos and slums? Why do our beautiful mountains and streams become polluted? It is because of the heart
of man.
"ruin and misery mark their paths,
and the way of peace they do not know." {Rom n%;E2.;JGwg,I
I have often thought this would be an appropriate sy3D4Ivs3uvMfivoIcMiCv 4Mc3ImYvU.fivl41v3svTi4)ivMfiy do
not know." An intense and cruel war is being foughtvcIvriL4I3IvM3C41v4ICvMfivoIcMiCv 4Mc3ImvcmvfiyTyims to
stop it because "the way of peace they do not know." The cause of this follows, in just one sentence:
"There is no fear of God before their eyes.UvHW3HvnS;0v w6I
That brings us right back to Chapter 1, Verse 18 of Romans. "The wrath of God is being revealed from
heaven against all the godlessness ... of men..." When men reject God, they lose everything. All these things
follow because "there is no fear of God before their eyes."
Re W-5v,jk(—vwIvMficuvl41mvj2(v;9b;J—Sv.ficuvsiiMv4re swift to shed blood; that is, they are very industrious to
compass any cruel design, ready to lay hold of all such opportunities. Wherever they go, destruction and
misery go along with them; these are their companions..destruction and misery to the people of God, to the

country and neighbourhood where they live, to the land and nation, and to themselves at last. Besides the
destruction and misery that are at the end of their ways (death is the end of these things), destruction and
misery are in their ways; their sin is its own punishment: a man needs no more to make him miserable than to
be a slave to his sins...And the way of peace have they not known; that is, they know not how to preserve
peace with others, nor how to obtain peace for themselves. They may talk of peace, such a peace as is in the
devil's palace, while he keeps it, but they are strangers to all true peace; they know not the things that belong
to their peace. These are quoted from Prov. i. 16; Isa. Lix. 7, 8.
16 ruin and misery mark their ways,
utW niIsαDestruction - That is, they “cause” the destruction or the ruin of the reputation,
happiness, and peace of others.
Misery - Calamity, ruin.
In their ways - Wherever they go. This is a striking description not only of the wicked then,
but of all times. The tendency of their conduct is to destroy the virtue, happiness, and peace of
all with whom they come in contact.
CLARKE, “Destruction and misery are in their ways - destruction is their work, and
Misery to themselves and to the objects of their malice is the consequence of their impious and
murderous conduct.
GILL, “Destruction and misery are in their ways. This passage also is to be found in
Isa_59:7, and may be understood either actively thus: all the ways they take, and methods they
pursue, are to make their fellow creatures miserable, to ruin and destroy them; or passively, that
by their sinful ways and vicious course of life, they themselves are brought to destruction and
misery: the way they are walking in is, "the broad way, that leadeth to destruction", Mat_7:13;
the end of it, what it issues in, is eternal death, the destruction of the body and soul in hell,
which will be attended with endless and inexpressible m
εn WoIsα
Htarih Isα
Destruction and misery are in their ways; and the way of peace have
they not known — This is a supplementary statement about men’s ways, suggested by what
had been said about the “feet,” and expresses the mischief and misery which men scatter in their
path, instead of that peace which, as strangers to it themselves, they cannot diffuse.
bt?(r Isα16.Very striking is the sentence that is added from Isaiah, Ruin and misery are in all their

ways; (102) for it is a representation of ferociousness above measure barbarous, which produces solitude
and waste by destroying every thing wherever it prevails: it is the same as the description which Pliny gives
ofDomitian.
(102)
Rom_3:15 are taken from Isa_59:7. Both the Hebrew and the Septuagint are alike, but Paul has
abbreviated them, and changed two words in the Greek version, having put
οξει᾿ forταχινοι and ἔγνωσαν
for ὀίδασι and has followed that version in leaving out “” before “” — Ed.

17 and the way of peace they do not know." [
7]
rtW ed9v4And the way of peace ... - What tends to promote their own happiness, or that of
others, they do not regard. Intent on their plans of evil, they do not know or regard what is
suited to promote the welfare of themselves or others. This is the case with all who are selfish,
and who seek to gain their own purposes of crime and ambition.
CLARKE, “And the way of peace have they not known - They neither have peace in
themselves, nor do they suffer others to live in quiet: they are brooders and fomenters of
discord.
GILL, “And the way of peace have they not known. This is a citation front
Isa_59:8, and
expresses the ignorance of mankind, with regard to true peace, and the way unto it: men are
naturally ignorant of the way of peace with God; of the first step which God took towards it; of
the council and covenant of peace, in which the scheme of it was drawn, and the method fixed;
of Christ the peacemaker, and of the way in which he has made it; and of the Gospel, which
reveals and publishes it. They are ignorant of the true way of enjoying peace of conscience; they
have no true peace of mind, their consciences are often tortured; and though they may have a
stupid and secure peace, yet nothing that is true, real, and solid; for they are without the Spirit,
whose fruit is peace; and without faith in Christ, by which true peace only is enjoyed; nor are
they spiritually minded, which is life and peace; nor have they any knowledge of the way to have
it; they are ready to think it must be had by doing something of their own, and not that it is to be
had only in Christ, in his blood and righteousness. They are ignorant of the paths of wisdom,
which are peace; peace is enjoyed in them, they lead unto it, and issue in it: they know not the
way to eternal peace; they imagine something done by the creature is the way; and are ignorant
that Christ is the only way of salvation, the true way to eternal life, everlasting peace and
happiness: yea, they know not the way of peace among men, and one another; nor will they do
that which is just and right, in order to support and maintain it, but are unjust, deceitful, and
quarrelsome; they do not study peace, but rather contention, which they like and approve of.
The Jews talk (x) much of their good nature, affability, and condescension, and of their doing
this and that, and the other thing, hv XWeBnaWe46wuWI9HiSYyHWN’WTMHWmSUyWN’WAHSiHI8W

bt?(r Isα17.It follows, The way of peace they have not known: they are so habituated to plunders, acts
of violence and wrong, to savageness and cruelty, that they know not how to act kindly and courteously.
18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes." [
8]
utW niIsαThere is no fear of God - Psa_36:1. The word “fear” here denotes “reverence,
awe, veneration.” There is no such regard or reverence for the character, authority, and honor of
God as to restrain them from crime. Their conduct shows that they are not withheld from the
commission of iniquity by any regard to the fear or favor of God. The only thing that will be
effectual in restraining people from sin, will be a regard to the honor and Law of God.
In regard to these quotations from the Old Testament, we may make the following remarks.
(1) They fully establish the position of the apostle, that the nation, as such, was far from being
righteous, or that they could be justified by their own works. By quotations from no less than six
distinct places in their own writings, referring to different periods of their history, he shows
what the character of the nation was. And as this was the characteristic of those times. it
followed that a Jew could not hope to be saved simply because he was a Jew. He needed, as
much as the Gentile, the benefit of some other plan of salvation.
(2) These passages show us how to use the Old Testament, and the facts of ancient history.
They are to be adduced not as showing directly what the character of man is, now, but to show
what human nature is. They demonstrate what man is when under the most favorable
circumstances; in different situations; and at different periods of the world. The concurrence of
past facts shows what the race is. And as past facts are uniform; as man thus far, in the most
favorable circumstances, has been sinful; it follows that this is the characteristic of man
everywhere. It is settled by the facts of the world, just as any other characteristic of man is
settled by the uniform occurrence of facts in all circumstances and times. Ancient facts, and
quotations of Scripture, therefore, are to be adduced as proofs of the tendency of human nature.
So Paul used them, and so it is lawful for us to use them.
(3) It may be observed further, that the apostle has given a view of human depravity which is
very striking. He does not confine it to one faculty of the mind, or to one set of actions; he
specifies each member and each faculty as being perverse, and inclined to evil. The depravity
extends to all the departments of action. The tongue, the mouth, the feet, the “lips,” are all
involved in it; all are perverted, and all become the occasion of the commission of sin. The entire
man is corrupt; and the painful description extends to every department of action.
(4) If such was the character of the Jewish nation under all its advantages, what must have
been the character of the pagan? We are prepared thus to credit all that is said in Rom. i., and
elsewhere, of the sad state of the pagan world.
(5) What a melancholy view we have thus of human nature. From whatever quarter we
contemplate it, we come to the same conclusion. Whatever record we examine; whatever history
we read; whatever time or period we contemplate; we find the same facts, and are forced to the
same conclusion. All are involved in sin, and are polluted, and ruined, and helpless. Over these
ruins we should sit down and weep, and lift our eyes with gratitude to the God of mercy, that he

has pitied us in our low estate, and has devised a plan by which “these ruins may be built again,”
and lost, fallen man be raised up to forfeited “glory, honor, and immortality.”
CLARKE, “There is no fear of God before their eyes - This completes their bad
character; they are downright atheists, at least practically such. They fear not God’s judgments,
although his eye is upon them in their evil ways. There is not one article of what is charged
against the Jews and Gentiles here that may not be found justified by the histories of both, in the
most ample manner. And what was true of them in those primitive times is true of them still.
With very little variation, these are the evils in which the vast mass of mankind delight and live.
Look especially at men in a state of warfare; look at the nations of Europe, who enjoy most of the
light of God; see what has taken place among them from 1792 to 1814; see what destruction of
millions, and what misery of hundreds of millions, have been the consequence of Satanic
excitement in fallen, ferocious passions! O Sin, what hast thou done! How many myriads of
souls hast thou hurried, unprepared, into the eternal world! Who, among men or angels, can
estimate the greatness of this calamity! this butchery of souls! What widows, what orphans, are
left to deplore their sacrificed husbands and parents, and their own consequent wretchedness!
And whence sprang all this? From that, whence come all wars and fightings; the evil desires of
men; the lust of dominion; the insatiable thirst for money; and the desire to be sole and
independent. This is the sin that ruined our first parents, expelled them from paradise, and
which has descended to all their posterity; and proves fully, incontestably proves, that we are
their legitimate offspring; the fallen progeny of fallen parents; children in whose ways are
destruction and misery; in whose heart there is no faith; and before whose eyes there is nothing
of the fear of God.
GILL, “There is no fear of God before their eyes. The place referred to is
Psa_36:1, by the "fear of God", is not meant a fear of God's wrath, of hell and
damnation; nor a fearful distrust of his presence, power, providence, and grace; much
less an hypocritical fear; but a reverential affection for God, and which is peculiar to the
children of God, which springs from a sense of divine goodness, is attended with
holiness of heart and life, is consistent with faith, even full assurance of it, and with
spiritual joy in its highest degree; it stands opposed to pride and haughtiness, and is a
blessing of the covenant of grace: now this is not to be found in unregenerate men, for
this springs from grace, and not nature, and is only implanted in the heart in
conversion; it appears from the whole life and conversation of unconverted men, that
the fear of God is not in their hearts, nor before their eyes.
BiwahesE <There is no fear of God before their eyes — (Psa_36:1): that is, “Did
the eyes but ‘see Him who is invisible’ (Heb_11:27), a reverential awe of Him with whom
we have to do would chasten every joy and lift the soul out of its deepest depressions;
but to all this the natural man is a stranger.” How graphic is this picture of human
depravity, finding its way through each several organ of the body into the life
(Rom_3:13-17): but how small a part of the “desperate wickedness” that is within

(Jer_17:9) “proceedeth out of the heart of man!” (Mar_7:21-23; Psa_19:12).
gtsFo 9v418.In the last clause (103) he repeats again, in other words, what we have
noticed at the beginning — that every wickedness flows from a disregard of God: for as
the principal part of wisdom is the fear of God, when we depart from that, there remains
in us nothing right or pure. In short, as it is a bridle to restrain our wickedness, so when
it is wanting, we feel at liberty to indulge every kind of licentiousness.
And that these testimonies may not seem to any one to have been unfitly produced, let
us consider each of them in connection with the passages from which they have been
taken. David says in Psa_14:1, that there was such perverseness in men, that God,
hid from the sight of God. He speaks indeed at the end of the Psalm of the redemption
of Israel: but we shall presently show how men become holy, and how far they are
exempt from this condition. In the other Psalms he speaks of the treachery of his
enemies, while he was exhibiting in himself and in his descendants a type of the
kingdom of Christ: hence we have in his adversaries the representatives of all those,
who being alienated from Christ, are not led by his Spirit. Isaiah expressly mentions
Israel; and therefore his charge applies with still greater force against the Gentiles.
What, then? There is no doubt but that the character of men is described in those
words, in order that we may see what man is when left to himself; for Scripture testifies
that all men are in this state, who are not regenerated by the grace of God. The
condition of the saints would be nothing better, were not this depravity corrected in
them: and that they may still remember that they differ nothing from others by nature,
they do find in the relics of their flesh (by which they are always encompassed) the
seeds of those evils, which would constantly produce fruits, were they not prevented by
being mortified; and for this mortification they are indebted to God’ mercy and not to
their own nature. We may add, that though all the vices here enumerated are not found
conspicuously in every individual, yet they may be justly and truly ascribed to human
nature, as we have already observed on Rom_1:26.

keep strictly to the expressions.
There is a difference of opinion as to the precise object of the Apostle; whether in these
quotations he had regard to the Jews only, or to both Jews and Gentiles. In the
introduction, Rom_3:9, he mentions both, and in the conclusion, Rom_3:19, he
evidently refers to both, in these words, “ every, mouth may be stopped, and all the
world may become guilty before God.”
The most consistent view seems to be, that the passages QUOTED refer both to

Jews and Gentiles; the last, more especially, to the Jews, while some of the preceding
have a special reference to the Gentile world, particularly Psa_14:0, as it describes the
character of the enemies of God and his people, to whose liberation the Psalmist refers
in the last verse. — Ed.
HENRY, “(3.) The root of all this we have: There is no fear of God before their eyes, v. 18. The
fear of God is here put for all practical religion, which consists in an awful and serious regard to
the word and will of God as our rule, to the honour and glory of God as our end. Wicked people
have not this before their eyes; that is, they do not steer by it; they are governed by other rules,
aim at other ends. This is quoted from Ps. xxxvi. 1. Where no fear of God is, no good is to be
expected. The fear of God is would lay a restraint upon our spirits, and keep them right, Neh. v.
15. When once fear is cast off, prayer is restrained (Job xv. 4), and then all goes to wreck and
ruin quickly. So that we have here a short account of the general depravity and corruption of
mankind; and may say, O Adam! what hast thou done? God made man upright, but thus he hath
sought out many inventions.
θ)s pJsJ,sὗ.pJsg;vgsJ;vg,A,jsg;,sSvJswvOwIsCgswvOwsto those
who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced
and the whole world held accountable to God.
utW niIsαNow we know - We all admit. It is a conceded plain point.
What things soever - Whether given as precepts, or recorded as historical facts. Whatever
things are found in the Law. “The law saith.” This means here evidently the Old Testament.
From that the apostle had been drawing his arguments, and his train of thought requires us here
to understand the whole of the Old Testament by this. The same principle applies, however, to
all law, that it speaks only to those to whom it is expressly given.
It saith to them ... - It speaks to them for whom it was expressly intended; to them for
whom the Law was made. The apostle makes this remark in order to prevent the Jew from
evading the force of his conclusion. He had brought proofs from their own acknowledged laws,
from writings given expressly for them, and which recorded their own history, and which they
admitted to be divinely inspired. These proofs, therefore, they could not evade.
That every mouth may be stopped - This is perhaps, a proverbial expression,
Job_5:15;
Psa_107:42. It denotes that they would be thoroughly convinced; that the argument would be so
conclusive as that they would have nothing to reply; that all objections would be silenced. Here
it denotes that the argument for the depravity of the Jews from the Old Testament was so clear
and satisfactory, that nothing could be alleged in reply. This may be regarded as the conclusion
of his whole argument, and the expressions may refer not to the Jews only, but to all the world.
Its meaning may, perhaps, be thus expressed, “The Gentiles are proved guilty by their own
deeds, and by a violation of the laws of nature. They sin against their own conscience; and have
thus been shown to be guilty before God Rom. 1. The Jews have also been shown to be guilty; all
their objections have been silenced by an independent train of remark; by appeals to their own

Law; by arguments drawn from the authority which they admit. Thus, the mouths of both are
stopped. Thus, the whole world becomes guilty before God.” I regard, therefore, the word “that”
here oνα hina as referring, not particularly to the argument from the Law of the Jews, but to the
whole previous train of argument, embracing both Jews and Gentiles. His conclusion is thus
general or universal, drawn from arguments adapted to the two great divisions of mankind.
And all the world - Both Jews and Gentiles, for so the strain of the argument shows. That is,
all by nature; all who are out of Christ; all who are not pardoned. All are guilty where there is not
some scheme contemplating forgiveness, and which is not applied to purify them. The apostle in
all this argument speaks of what man is, and ever would be, without some plan of justification
appointed by God.
May become - May “be.” They are not made guilty by the Law; but the argument from the
Law, and from fact, proves that they are guilty.
Guilty before God - pqqgk\'bR0rRsWr i.oawD5arRvtR{itt. Margin, “subject to the judgment of
God.” The phrase is taken from courts of justice. It is applied to a man who has not vindicated or
defended himself; against whom therefore the charge or the indictment is found true; and who
is in consequence subject to punishment. The idea is that of subjection to punishment; but
always because the man personally deserves it, and because being unable to vindicate himself,
he ought to be punished. It is never used to denote simply an obligation to punishment, but with
reference to the fact that the punishment is personally deserved.” This word, rendered “guilty,”
is not used elsewhere in the New Testament, nor is it found in the Septuagint. The argument of
the apostle here shows,
(1) That in order to guilt, there must be a law, either that of nature or by revelation Rom. 1; 2;
3; and,
(2) That in order to guilt, there must be a violation of that law which may be charged on them
as individuals, and for which they are to be held personally responsible.
CLARKE, “What things soever the law saith - That the word law, here, does not mean the
pentateuch, is evident from the preceding quotations, not one of which is taken from that work.
Either the term law must here mean the Jewish writings in general, or that rule of moral
conduct which God had given to both Jews and Gentiles: to the former in their own Scriptures;
to the latter in that law written in their hearts by his own Spirit, and acknowledged in their
written codes, and in their pleadings in every civil case. Now, according to this great law, this
rule of moral conduct, whether given in a written revelation, as to the Jews, or by the secret
inspiration of his Spirit, as in certain cases to the Gentiles, every mouth must be stopped, and
the whole world,
qHbR'R\'"]'b, both Jews and Gentiles, stand convicted before God: for all
mankind have sinned against this law.
GILL, “Now we know that what things soever the law saith,.... By "the law" is meant,
not the law of nature, nor the civil law of nations, nor the ceremonial law of the Jews, nor barely
the five books of Moses, nor the book of Psalms, of the Prophets, or the writings of the whole Old
Testament; but the moral law, as it appears in the whole word of God, which every man is bound
to observe, of which all are transgressors, by which is the knowledge of sin, which no man can be
justified by, and which Christ was made under, and came to fulfil. This law is represented as a

person speaking, and saying many things, some of which are here mentioned; so, T3 CRT3YAeRnvitR
(yfRry2rnRraRyIwRraeRDrRyIR.r.y(RoisyrtRfDviR}tfDriRfsDvtsrR(y).R{itRotsraIrRDvRroty5rRvaeRystR
vitdRviyvRystR.IwtsRvitR(yfvitdRviyvRystR.IwtsRvitR(yfvitdRviyvRystR.IwtsRvitR(yfvitdRviyvRystR.IwtsRvitR(yf8RvitR}tfrRftstRDIRyRotG.(DysRrtIrtR.IwtsRDveRyrRDvRfyrRVD4tIRvaRvitdR,2RFartr8R
y((RdyI5DIwRystR.IwtsRDveRyrRvaRvitRdyvvtsRapRDv8Rvit2RystR.IwtsRa,(DVyvDaIRvaRa,twDtIGtRvaRDveRyIweRvisa.ViR
wDra,twDtIGteRGadtR.IwtsRDvrRrtIvtIGtRapRGaIwtdIyvDaI.R{itRt(tGvRapR6awRvitdrt(4trRftsteRyIwRystRDIR
radtRrtIrtR.IwtsRDv8RIavRDIwttwRyrRyRGa4tIyIvRapRfas5reRasRyrRDIRvitRiyIwrRapRFartreRIasRyrRyR2a5tRapR
,aIwyVt8RIasRystRvit2Ra,(DVtwRvaRrtt5RpasR–.rvDpDGyvDaIR,2RDveRyIwRystRtIvDst(2Rwt(D4tstwRpsadRvitRG.srtRyIwR
GaIwtdIyvDaIRapRDvR,2R—isDrv.R{it2RftstR.IwtsRDveRyIwRviyvRyrRyRGa4tIyIvRapRfas5reRyrRDIR’wydeRvitRptwtsy(R
itywRyIwRstostrtIvyvD4tRapRy((RdyI5DIw8RyIwRGydtR.IwtsRDvrRrtIvtIGtRapRGaIwtdIyvDaIRyIwRwtyvieRpasRiDrR
rDIeRyIwRvitDsRafIRyGv.y(RvsyIrVstrrDaIr8RfiDGiRDrRGaIrDrvtIvRfDviRvitRt4ts(yrvDIVR(a4tRapR6awRvaRvitdRDIR
—isDrveRvitRGa4tIyIvRapRVsyGtRdywtRfDviRvitdRDIRiDdeRyrRvitDsRitywRyIwRr.stv2eRyIwRvitDsR–.rvDpDGyvDaIR,2R
iDdURyIwRvit2RystRIafR.IwtsRDveRyrRDIRvitRiyIwrRapR—isDrv8RyIwR(aa5R.oaIRvitdrt(4trRyrRa,(DVtweR,2RvitR
(a4tRapR—isDrveRvaR2Dt(wRyRGittsp.(Ra,twDtIGtRvaRDvURitstRDvRdtyIrRr.GiRyrRystRvsyIrVstrrasrRapRvitR(yfeRyIwR
raR.IwtsRa,(DVyvDaIRvaRo.IDridtIveRfDvia.vRyI2RstVyswRvaR}tfRasR6tIvD(teRasRyI2RwDrvDIGvDaIR6awRiyrR
dywtRDIRiDrRafIR,styrvURyIwRvitRviDIVrRDvRry2rRvaRr.GiRysteRDvRGiysVtrRvitdRfDviRrDIeRyIwRGaI4DGvrRvitdRapRDveR
,aviRapRDvrRoa((.vDaIRyIwRV.D(vURraR
viyvRt4ts2Rda.viRdy2R,tRrvaootwviyvRt4ts2Rda.viRdy2R,tRrvaootwviyvRt4ts2Rda.viRdy2R,tRrvaootwviyvRt4ts2Rda.viRdy2R,tRrvaootw8RyIwRiy4tRIaviDIVRvaRry2RapRvitRo.sDv2RapRvitDsRIyv.steRfiDGiRyootysrRvaR
,tRraRryw(2RrvyDItw8RIasRapRvitDsRfas5rRapRsDVivta.rItrreRfiDGiRystRraRptfeRyIwRraR4ts2RDdotsptGv.R{itR(yfR
dy5trRr.GiRyRstostrtIvyvDaIRapRviDIVrRvaRvitdeRviyvRvitDsRda.virRystRrvaootwRpsadRV(as2DIVRDIRvitdrt(4treR
yIwRDIRvitDsRfas5reRfiDGiRystRpysRpsadR,tDIVRywt7.yvtRvaRvitRwtdyIwrRapRvitR(yf8RyIwRpsadRGado(yDIDIVR
yVyDIrvRvitRsDVivta.rR–.wVdtIvRapR6aweRria.(wRitRosaGttwRyVyDIrvRvitdRDIRvitRdarvRsDVasa.rRdyIItsUR
yIwRy((RvitRfas(wRdy2R,tGadtRV.D(v2R,tpastR6awyIwRy((RvitRfas(wRdy2R,tGadtRV.D(v2R,tpastR6awyIwRy((RvitRfas(wRdy2R,tGadtRV.D(v2R,tpastR6awyIwRy((RvitRfas(wRdy2R,tGadtRV.D(v2R,tpastR6aw8R}tfrRyIwR6tIvD(tr8Ry((RvitRDIwD4Dw.y(rRapRdyI5DIwRystR
V.D(v2R,tpastR6aweRyIwRfD((R,tRpa.IwRvaR,tRraeRraaItsRasR(yvtsURradtRstywRDveRnr.,–tGvRvaR6awneRyIwR
.IwtsrvyIwRDvRapRyRr.,–tGvDaIRvaRiDrRVsyGteR,tDIVR,sa.VivRvaRrttRvitDsRIttwRapRDveRyIwRapRry(4yvDaIR,2RDv8R,.vR
viDrRDrRIavRvitRGyrtRapRy((RvitRfas(weRsyvitsRυποδικος, signifies a subjection to that justice, vengeance,
and wrath of God, to which all men are liable in their own persons; since they are all found guilty
by the law, and will appear to be so, and therefore can never be justified by their obedience to it;
which is what the apostle is aiming at in all he here says, as appears from what follows; all which
"we know" to be true, and are fully assured of, who know the nature and spirituality of the law,
and to whom it has come with light and power.
&אדnןםלbונNow we know that what ... the law — that is, the Scriptures, considered as a
law of duty.

saith, it saith to them that are under the law — of course, therefore, to the Jews.
that every mouth — opened in self-justification.
may be stopped, and all the world may become — that is, be seen to be, and own itself.
guilty — and so condemned
before God.
gtsFo 9v419.Now we know, etc. Leaving the Gentiles, he distinctly ADDRESSES
his words to the
Jews; for he had a much more difficult work in subduing them, because they, though no less destitute of true
righteousness than the Gentiles, yet covered themselves with the cloak of God’ covenant, as though it was a
sufficient holiness to them to have been separated from the rest of the world by the election of God. And he
indeed mentions those evasions which he well understood the Jews were ready to bring forward; for
whatever was said in the law unfavorably of mankind, they usually applied to the Gentiles, as though they
were exempt from the common condition of men, and no doubt they would have been so, had they not fallen
from their own dignity. Hence, that no false conceit as to their own worthiness should be a hinderance to
them, and that they might not confine to the Gentiles alone what applied to them in common with others,
Paul here anticipates them, and shows, from what Scripture declares, that they were not only blended with
the multitude, but that condemnation was peculiarly denounced on them. And we indeed see the discretion
of the Apostle in undertaking to refute these objections; for to whom but to the Jews had the law been given,
and to whose instruction but theirs ought it to have served? What then it states respecting others is as it
were accidental; or as they say, παρεργον, an appendage; but it APPLIES its teaching mainly to its own
disciples.
Under the law He says that the Jews were those to whom the law was destined, it hence follows, that it
especially regards them; and under the word law he includes also the Prophets, and so the whole of the Old
Testament — That every mouth may be stopped, etc.; that is, that every evasion may be cut off, and every
occasion for excuse. It is a metaphor taken from courts of law, where the accused, if he has anything to
plead as a lawful defense, demands leave to speak, that he might clear himself from the things laid to his
charge; but if he is convicted by his own conscience, he is silent, and without saying a word waits for his
condemnation, being even already by his own silence condemned. Of the same meaning is this saying
in Job_40:4, “ will lay my hand on my mouth.” He indeed says, that though he was not altogether without
some kind of excuse, he would yet cease to justify himself, and SUBMIT to the sentence of God. The next
clause contains the explanation; for his mouth is stopped, who is so fast held by the sentence of
condemnation, that he can by no means escape. According to another sense, to be silent before the Lord is
to tremble at his majesty, and to stand mute, being astonished at his brightness.
(105)
(105) To see the force and meaning of this verse, we must bear in mind that the former part was said to
prevent the Jews from evading the APPLICATION
of the preceding testimonies; and then the words “
every mouth,” etc., and “ all the world,” etc., were added, not so much to include the Gentiles, as to include
the Jews, who thought themselves exempted. No doubt the Gentiles are included, but the special object of
the Apostle evidently seems to prevent the Jews from supposing that they were not included. In no other
way can the connection between the two parts of the verse be understood. — Ed.

dpfWieh 9v4JcNHvMCvHcuvHyOuv)AIDMHMAIvAmvHcuvRcAGuvworld, "guilty before God." This is the right attitude
for the whole human race, to stand with its finger on its lip, having nothing to say as to why it should not be
condemned.

STEDMA, “When you read this terrible description of the human race as God sees it, it is almost impossible
for us to believe that God is not going to say, "Enough! Wipe them out!" If all he sees is wretchedness, misery,
evil, deceit, hypocrisy, vulgarity, profanity, slander, and all these evil things that are in every heart .. every
one without exception .. our natural instinct is to say, "Then God doesn't want us." But the amazing thing is
that across this kind of verse he writes, "God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son," {John
3:16a KJV}. God did not send the Law to destroy us (and this is very important); he sent the Law to keep us
from false hope.
The worst thing that can happen is to be going down a road to an important destination and think you are on
the right track and spend all the time necessary to get there only to discover that the road peters out into
nothingness. You find you have been on the wrong track and it is too late to go back. That was what was
happening. So God, in his loving kindness, has given us the Law to keep us from taking a false path. Though
the Law condemns us, it is that very condemnation that makes us willing to listen, so that we find the right
path.
Paul says the Law does three things to us: First, it stops our mouth: We have nothing to say. You can always
tell someone is close to becoming a Christian when they shut up and stop arguing back. Self.righteous people
are always saying, "But .. but this .. but I .. yes, but I do this .. and I do that." They are always arguing. But
when they see the true meaning of the Law, their mouth is shut. When you read a statement like this, there is
really nothing left to say, is there?
I had a friend who told me she was given a traffic ticket one day. She was guilty of doing what she was
charged with, but she felt there was some justification for it, so she thought she would go to court and argue it
before the judge. She imagined in her mind how she would come in and the judge would ask her if she was
guilty. She would say, "Yes, but I want to explain why." She would proceed to convince the judge and all the
court that what she did could hardly be avoided and that she was justified in doing it. Her argument was
ready. "But," she said, "when I came into that court and stood up there all alone, and the judge was there on
the bench, dressed in his robe, and he looked over his glasses at me and said, 'Guilty or not guilty?' all my
arguments faded. I just said, 'Guilty.'" Her mouth was stopped.
That is the first thing the Law does: it shuts you up, and you do not argue Second, Paul says, "The whole
world is held accountable to God." That makes us realize there is no easy way, no way by which death
suddenly is going to dissolve all things into everlasting darkness, forever forgotten. The whole world has to
stand before God. Hebrews puts it so starkly, "It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the
judgment," {Heb 9:27 KJV}.
Finally, the Law reveals very clearly what sin is. What does the Law want of us? Jesus said that all the Law is
summed up in one word: Love. All the Law asks us to do is to act in love. All these things the Law states are
simply loving ways of acting. When we face ourselves before the Law, we have to confess that many, many
times we fail in love. We do not love. That is what the Law wants us to see, because, then, when all else fails,
we are ready to listen to what follows.
HERY, “From all this Paul infers that it is in vain to look for justification by the works of the law, and that
it is to be had only by faith, which is the point he has been all along proving, from ch. i. 17, and which he lays
down (v. 28) as the summary of his discourse, with a quod erat demonstrandum..which was to be
demonstrated. We conclude that a man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the law; not by the deeds of
the first law of pure innocence, which left no room for repentance, nor the deeds of the law of nature, how
highly soever improved, nor the deeds of the ceremonial law (the blood of bulls and goats could not take away
sin), nor the deeds of the moral law, which are certainly included, for he speaks of that law by which is the
knowledge of sin and those works which might be matter of boasting. Man, in his depraved state, under the
power of such corruption, could never, by any works of his own, gain acceptance with God; but it must be
resolved purely into the free grace of God, given through Jesus Christ to all true believers that receive it as a
free gift. If we had never sinned, our obedience to the law would have been our righteousness: "Do this, and
live." But having sinned, and being corrupted, nothing that we can do will atone for our former guilt. It was
by their obedience to the moral law that the Pharisees looked for justification, Luke xviii. 11. ow there are
two things from which the apostle here argues: the guiltiness of man, to prove that we cannot be justified by

the works of the law, and the glory of God, to prove that we must be justified by faith.
I. He argues from man's guiltiness, to show the folly of expecting justification by the works of the law. The
argument is very plain: we can never be justified and saved by the law that we have broken. A convicted
traitor can never come off by pleading the statute of 25 Edward III., for that law discovers his crime and
condemns him: indeed, if he had never broken it, he might have been justified by it; but now it is past that he
has broken it, and there is no way of coming off but by pleading the act of indemnity, upon which he has
surrendered and submitted himself, and humbly and penitently claiming the benefit of it and casting himself
:T3IvcM(v 3lv)3I)iuIcIDvMfivD:cyMcIimmv3svH4I5
1. He fastens it particularly upon the Jews; for they were the men that made their boast of the law, and set
up for justification by it. He had quoted several scriptures out of the Old Testament to show this corruption:
3l5vm41mvfivj2(v;V—5vMfcmvMf4MvMfivy4lvm41m5vcMvm4ys to those who are under the law; this conviction belongs to
the Jews as well as others, for it is written in their law. The Jews boasted of their being under the law, and
placed a great deal of confidence in it: "But," says he, "the law convicts and condemns you..you see it does."
That every mouth may be stopped..that all boasting may be silenced. See the method that God takes both in
justifying and condemning: he stops every mouth; those that are justified have their mouths stopped by a
humble conviction; those that are condemned have their mouths stopped too, for they shall at last be
convinced (Jude 15), and sent speechless to hell, Matt. xxii. 12. All iniquity shall stop her mouth, Ps. cvii. 42.
2. He extends it in general to all the world: That all the world may become guilty before God. If the
world likes in wickedness (1 John v. 19), to be sure it is guilty...May become guilty; that is, may be proved
guilty, liable to punishment, all by nature children of wrath, Eph. ii. 3. They must all plead guilty; those that
stand most upon their own justification will certainly be cast. Guilty before God is a dreadful word, before an
all.seeing God, that is not, nor can be, deceived in his judgment..before a just and righteous judge, who will
by no means clear the guilty. All are guilty, and therefore all have need of a righteousness wherein to appear
before God. For all have sinned (v. 23); all are sinners by nature, by practice, and have come short of the
glory of God..have failed of that which is the chief end of man. Come short, as the archer comes short of the
mark, as the runner comes short of the prize; so come short, as not only not to win, but to be great losers.
Come short of the glory of God. (1.) Come short of glorifying God. See ch. i. 21, They glorified him not as
God. Man was placed at the head of the visible creation, actively to glorify that great Creator whom the
inferior creatures could glorify only objectively; but man by sin comes short of this, and, instead of glorifying
God, dishonours him. It is a very melancholy consideration, to look upon the children of men, who were made
to glorify God, and to think how few there are that do it. (2.) Come short of glorying before God. There is no
boasting of innocency: if we go about to glory before God, to boast of any thing we are, or have, or do, this
will be an everlasting estoppel..that we have all sinned, and this will silence us. We may glory before men,
who are short.sighted, and cannot search our hearts,..who are corrupt, as we are, and well enough pleased
with sin; but there is no glorying before God, who cannot endure to look upon iniquity. (3.) Come short of
being glorified by God. Come short of justification, or acceptance with God, which is glory begun..come short
of the holiness or sanctification which is the glorious image of God upon man, and have overthrown all hopes
and expectations of being glorified with God in heaven by any righteousness of their own. It is impossible now
to get to heaven in the way of spotless innocency. That passage is blocked up. There is a cherub and a flaming
sword set to keep that way to the tree of life.
atgrtWe v;Vbk…5v,
WORLD-WIDE SIN AND WORLD-WIDE REDEMPTION
Let us note in general terms the large truths which this passage contains. We may mass these
under four heads:
I. Paul’s view of the purpose of the law.
He has been quoting a mosaic of Old Testament passages from the Psalms and Isaiah. He
regards these as part of ‘the law,’ which term, therefore, in his view, here includes the whole
previous revelation, considered as making known God’s will as to man’s conduct. Every word of
God, whether promise, or doctrine, or specific command, has in it some element bearing on
conduct. God reveals nothing only in order that we may know, but all that, knowing, we may do
and be what is pleasing in His sight. All His words are law.

But Paul sets forth another view of its purpose here; namely, to drive home to men’s consciences
the conviction of sin. That is not the only purpose, for God reveals duty primarily in order that
men may do it, and His law is meant to be obeyed. But, failing obedience, this second purpose
comes into action, and His law is a swift witness against sin. The more clearly we know our duty,
the more poignant will be our consciousness of failure. The light which shines to show the path
of right, shines to show our deviations from it. And that conviction of sin, which it was the very
purpose of all the previous Revelation to produce, is a merciful gift; for, as the Apostle implies, it
is the prerequisite to the faith which saves.
As a matter of fact, there was a far profounder and more inward conviction of sin among the
Jews than in any heathen nation. Contrast the wailings of many a psalm with the tone in Greek
or Roman literature. No doubt there is a law written on men’s hearts which evokes a lower
measure of the same consciousness of sin. There are prayers among the Assyrian and
Babylonian tablets which might almost stand beside the Fifty-first Psalm; but, on the whole, the
deep sense of sin was the product of the revealed law. The best use of our consciousness of what
we ought to be, is when it rouses conscience to feel the discordance with it of what we are, and so
drives us to Christ. Law, whether in the Old Testament, or as written in our hearts by their very
make, is the slave whose task is to bring us to Christ, who will give us power to keep God’s
commandments.
Another purpose of the law is stated in Rom_3:21, as being to bear witness, in conjunction with
the prophets, to a future more perfect revelation of God’s righteousness. Much of the law was
symbolic and prophetic. The ideal it set forth could not always remain unfulfilled. The whole
attitude of that system was one of forward-looking expectancy. There is much danger lest, in
modern investigations as to the authorship, date, and genesis of the Old Testament revelation,
its central characteristic should be lost sight of; namely, its pointing onwards to a more perfect
revelation which should supersede it.
II. Paul’s view of universal sinfulness.
He states that twice in this passage (Rom_3:20-24), and it underlies his view of the purpose of
law. In Rom_3:20 he asserts that ‘by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified,’ and in
Rom_3:23 he advances from that negative statement to the positive assertion that all have
sinned. The impossibility of justification by the works of the law may be shown from two
considerations: one, that, as a matter of fact, no flesh has ever done them all with absolute
completeness and purity; and, second, that, even if they had ever been so done, they would not
have availed to secure acquittal at a tribunal where motive counts for more than deed. The
former is the main point with Paul.
In Rom_3:23 the same fact of universal experience is contemplated as both positive sin and
negative falling short of the ‘glory’ (which here seems to mean, as in Joh_5:44, Joh_12:43,
approbation from God). ‘There is no distinction,’ but all varieties of condition, character,
attainment, are alike in this, that the fatal taint is upon them all. ‘We have, all of us, one human
heart.’ We are alike in physical necessities, in primal instincts, and, most tragically of all, in the
common experience of sinfulness.
Paul does not mean to bring all varieties of character down to one dead level, but he does mean
to assert that none is free from the taint. A man need only be honest in self-examination to
endorse the statement, so far as he himself is concerned. The Gospel would be better understood
if the fact of universal sinfulness were more deeply felt. Its superiority to all schemes for making
everybody happy by rearrangements of property, or increase of culture, would be seen through;
and the only cure for human misery would be discerned to be what cures universal sinfulness.
III. So we have next Paul’s view of the remedy for man’s sin.
That is stated in general terms in Rom_3:21-22. Into a world of sinful men comes streaming the

light of a ‘righteousness of God.’ That expression is here used to mean a moral state of
conformity with God’s will, imparted by God. The great, joyful message, which Paul felt himself
sent to proclaim, is that the true way to reach the state of conformity which law requires, and
which the unsophisticated, universal conscience acknowledges not to have been reached, is the
way of faith.
The message is so familiar to us that we may easily fail to realise its essential greatness and
wonderfulness when first proclaimed. That God should give righteousness, that it should be ‘of
God,’ not only as coming from Him, but as, in some real way, being kindred with His own
perfection; that it should be brought to men by Jesus Christ, as ancient legends told that a
beneficent Titan brought from heaven, in a hollow cane, the gift of fire; and that it should
become ours by the simple process of trusting in Jesus Christ, are truths which custom has
largely robbed of their wonderfulness. Let us meditate more on them till they regain, by our own
experience of their power, some of the celestial light which belongs to them.
Observe that in Rom_3:22 the universality of the redemption which is in Christ is deduced from
the universality of sin. The remedy must reach as far as the disease. If there is no difference in
regard to sin, there can be none in regard to the sweep of redemption. The doleful universality of
the covering spread over all nations, has corresponding to it the blessed universality of the light
which is sent forth to flood them all. Sin’s empire cannot stretch farther than Christ’s kingdom.
IV. Paul’s view of what makes the Gospel the remedy.
In Rom_3:21-22 it was stated generally that Christ was the channel, and faith the condition, of
righteousness. The personal object of faith was declared, but not the special thing in Christ
which was to be trusted in. That is fully set forth in Rom_3:24. We cannot attempt to discuss the
great words in these verses, each of which would want a volume. But we may note that ‘justified’
here means to be accounted or declared righteous, as a judicial act; and that justification is
traced in its ultimate source to God’s ‘grace,’-His own loving disposition-which bends to
unworthy and lowly creatures, and is regarded as having for the medium of its bestowal the
‘redemption’ that is in Christ Jesus. That is the channel through which grace comes from God.
‘Redemption’ implies captivity, liberation, and a price paid. The metaphor of slaves set free by
ransom is exchanged in Rom_3:25 for a sacrificial reference. A propitiatory sacrifice averts
punishment from the offerer. The death of the victim procures the life of the worshipper. So, a
propitiatory or atoning sacrifice is offered by Christ’s blood, or death. That sacrifice is the
ransom-price through which our captivity is ended, and our liberty assured. As His redemption
is the channel ‘through’ which God’s grace comes to men, so faith is the condition ‘through’
which (Rom_3:25) we make that grace ours.
Note, then, that Paul does not merely point to Jesus Christ as Saviour, but to His death as the
saving power. We are to have faith in Jesus Christ (Rom_3:22). But that is not a complete
statement. It must be faith in His propitiation, if it is to bring us into living contact with His
redemption. A gospel which says much of Christ, but little of His Cross, or which dilates on the
beauty of His life, but stammers when it begins to speak of the sacrifice in His death, is not
Paul’s Gospel, and it will have little power to deal with the universal sickness of sin.
The last verses of the passage set forth another purpose attained by Christ’s sacrifice; namely,
the vindication of God’s righteousness in forbearing to inflict punishment on sins committed
before the advent of Jesus. That Cross rayed out its power in all directions-to the heights of the
heavens; to the depths of Hades (Col_1:20); to the ages that were to come, and to those that
were past. The suspension of punishment through all generations, from the beginning till that
day when the Cross was reared on Calvary, was due to that Cross having been present to the
divine mind from the beginning. ‘The judge is condemned when the guilty is acquitted,’ or left
unpunished. There would be a blot on God’s government, not because it was so severe, but

because it was so forbearing, unless His justice was vindicated, and the fatal consequences of sin
shown in the sacrifice of Christ. God could not have shown Himself just, in view either of age-
long forbearance, or of now justifying the sinner, unless the Cross had shown that He was not
immorally indulgent toward sin.
a Tnw tYiKf1oihdwtix tifhiaoiTpc1fixpf1ichr
Rom. 3:19.26
We know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are within the law, and the function of the law is
that every mouth should be silenced and that the whole world should be known to be liable to the judgment of
God, because no one will ever get into a right relationship with God by doing the works which the law lays
down. What does come through the law is a full awareness of sin. But now a way to a right relationship to
God lies open before us quite apart from the law, and it is a way attested by the law and the prophets. For a
right relationship to God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. For there is no distinction,
for all have sinned and all fall short of the glory of God, but they are put into a right relationship with God,
freely, by his grace, through the deliverance which is wrought by Jesus Christ. God put him forward as one
who can win for us forgiveness of our sins through faith in his blood. He did so in order to demonstrate his
righteousness because, in the forbearance of God, there had been a passing over of the sins which happened in
previous times; and he did so to demonstrate his righteousness in this present age, so that he himself should
be just and that he should accept as just the man who believes in Jesus.
Here again is a passage which is not easy to understand, but which is full of riches when its true meaning is
grasped. Let us see if we can penetrate to the basic truth behind it.
The supreme problem of life is, How can a man get into a right relationship with God? How can he feel at
peace with God? How can he escape the feeling of estrangement and fear in the presence of God? The religion
of Judaism answered: "A man can attain to a right relationship with God by keeping meticulously all that the
law lays down." But to say that is simply to say that there is no possibility of any man ever attaining to a right
relationship with God, for no man ever can keep every commandment of the law.
3dRAiAjyi-_IRL.viRJi5,ij_k:vin_kiJL-Jl-iAj,i-_u8vi:emands."
What then is the use of the law? It is that it makes a man aware of sin. It is only when a man knows the law
and tries to satisfy it that he realizes he can never satisfy it. The law is designed to show a man his own
weakness and his own sinfulness. Is a man then shut out from God? Far from it, because the way to God is
not the way of law, but the way of grace; not the way of works, but the way of faith.
To show what he means Paul uses three metaphors.
(i) He uses a metaphor from the law courts which we call justification. This metaphor thinks of man on trial
before God. The Greek word which is translated to justify is diakioun. All Greek verbs which end in ".oun"
mean, not to make someone something, but to treat, to reckon, to account him as something. If an innocent
man appears before a judge then to treat him as innocent is to acquit him. But the point about a man's
relationship to God is that he is utterly guilty, and yet God, in his amazing mercy, treats him, reckons him,
accounts him as if he were innocent. That is what justification means.
When Paul says that "God justifies the ungodly," he means that God treats the ungodly as if he had been a
good man. That is what shocked the Jews to the core of their being. To them to treat the bad man as if he was
good was the sign of a wicked judge. "He who justifies the wicked is an abomination to the Lord" (Prov.
17:15). "I will not acquit the wicked" (Exo. 23:7). But Paul says that is precisely what God does.
How can I know that God is like that? I know because Jesus said so. He came to tell us that God loves us, bad
as we are. He came to tell us that, although we are sinners, we are still dear to God. When we discover that
and believe it, it changes our whole relationship to God. We are conscious of our sin, but we are no longer in
terror and no longer estranged. Penitent and brokenhearted we come to God, like a sorry child coming to his
mother, and we know that the God we come to is love.
That is what justification by faith in Jesus Christ means. It means that we are in a right relationship with God
because we believe with all our hearts that what Jesus told us about God is true. We are no longer terrorized
strangers from an angry God. We are children, erring children, trusting in their Father's love for forgiveness.
And we could never have found that right relationship with God, if Jesus had not come to live and to die to
tell us how wonderfully he loves us.
(ii) Paul uses a metaphor from sacrifice. He says of Jesus that God put him forward as one who can win
forgiveness for our sins.

The Greek word that Paul uses to describe Jesus is hilasterion. This comes from a verb which means to
propitiate. It is a verb which has to do with sacrifice. Under the old system, when a man broke the law, he
brought to God a sacrifice. His aim was that the sacrifice should turn aside the punishment that should fall
upon him. To put it in another way..a man sinned; that sin put him at once in a wrong relationship with God;
to get back into the right relationship he offered his sacrifice.
But it was human experience that an animal sacrifice failed entirely to do that. "Thou hast no delight in
sacrifice; were I to give a burnt offering, thou wouldst not be pleased" (Ps. 51:16). "With what shall I come
before the Lord, and bow myself before God on high? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with
calves a year old? Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I
give my first.born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?" (Mic. 6:6.7.)
Instinctively men felt that, once they had sinned, the paraphernalia of earthly sacrifice could not put matters
right.
So Paul says, "Jesus Christ, by his life of obedience and his death of love, made the one sacrifice to God which
really and truly atones for sin." He insists that what happened on the Cross opens the door back to a right
relationship with God, a door which every other sacrifice is powerless to open.
(iii) Paul uses a metaphor from slavery. He speaks of the deliverance wrought through Jesus Christ. The word
is apolutrosis. It means a ransoming, a redeeming, a liberating. It means that man was in the power of sin,
and that Jesus Christ alone could free him from it.
Finally, Paul says of God that he did all this because he is just, and accepts as just all who believe in Jesus.
Paul never said a more startling thing than this. Bengel called it "the supreme paradox of the gospel." Think
what it means. It means that God is just and accepts the sinner as a just man. The natural thing to say would
be, "God is just, and, therefore, condemns the sinner as a criminal." But here we have the great paradox..
God is just, and somehow, in that incredible, miraculous grace that Jesus came to bring to men, he accepts the
sinner, not as a criminal, but as a son whom he still loves.
What is the essence of all this? Where is the difference between it and the old way of the law? The basic
difference is this..the way of obedience to the law is concerned with what a man can do for himself; the way of
grace is concerned with what God can do, and has done, for him. Paul is insisting that nothing we can ever do
can win for us the forgiveness of God; only what God has done for us can win that; therefore the way to a
right relationship with God lies, not in a frenzied, desperate, doomed attempt to win acquittal by our
performance; it lies in the humble, penitent acceptance of the love and the grace which God offers us in Jesus
Christ.
20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by
observing the law; rather, through the law we become
conscious of sin.
?tW ed5v,By the deeds of the law - By works; or by such deeds as the Law requires. The
word “Law” has, in the Scriptures, a great variety of significations. Its strict and proper meaning
is, a rule of conduct prescribed by superior authority. The course of reasoning in these chapters
shows the sense in which the apostle uses it here. He intends evidently to apply it to those rules
or laws by which the Jews and Gentiles pretended to frame their lives; and to affirm that people
could be justified by no conformity to those laws. He had shown Rom. 1 that “the pagan, the
entire Gentile world,” had violated the laws of nature; the rules of virtue made known to them by
reason, tradition, and conscience. He had shown the same Rom. 2–3 in respect to the Jews.
They had equally failed in rendering obedience to their Law. In both these cases the reference
was, not to “ceremonial” or ritual laws, but to the moral law; whether that law was made known
by reason or by revelation. The apostle had not been discussing the question whether they had
yielded obedience to their ceremonial law, but whether they had been found holy, that is,

whether they had obeyed the moral law. The conclusion was, that in all this they had failed, and
that therefore they could not be justified by that Law. That the apostle did not intend to speak of
external works only is apparent; for he all along charges them with a lack of conformity of the
heart no less than with a lack of conformity of the life; see Rom_1:26, Rom_1:29-31; Rom_2:28-
29. The conclusion is therefore a general one, that by no law, made known either by reason,
conscience, tradition, or revelation, could man be justified; that there was no form of obedience
which could be rendered, that would justify people in the sight of a holy God.
There shall no flesh - No man; no human being, either among the Jews or the Gentiles. It
is a strong expression, denoting the absolute universality of his conclusion; see the note at
Rom_1:3.
Be justified - Be regarded and treated as righteous. None shall be esteemed as having kept
the Law, and as being entitled to the rewards of obedience; see the note at Rom_1:17.
In his sight - Before him. God sits as a Judge to determine the characters of people, and he
shall not adjudge any to have kept the Law.
For by the law - That is, by all law. The connection shows that this is the sense. Law is a rule
of action. The effect of applying a rule to our conduct is to show us what sin is. The meaning of
the apostle clearly is, that the application of a law to try our conduct, instead of being a ground
of justification, will be merely to show us our own sinfulness and departures from duty. A man
may esteem himself to be very right and correct, until he compares himself with a rule, or law;
so whether the Gentiles compared their conduct with their laws of reason and conscience, or the
Jew his with his written law, the effect would be to show them how far they had departed. The
more closely and faithfully it should be applied, the more they would see it. So far from being
justified by it, they would be more and more condemned; compare Rom_7:7-10. The same is the
case now. This is the way in which a sinner is converted; and the more closely and faithfully the
Law is preached, the more will it condemn him, and show him that he needs some other plan of
salvation.
CLARKE, “Therefore, by the deeds of the law - On the score of obedience to this moral
law, there shall no flesh,
'uRqH"HR"H?i, no human being, be justified; none can be accepted in the
sight of God. And why? Because by the law is the knowledge of sin: it is that which ascertains
what sin is; shows how men have deviated from its righteous demands; and sentences them to
death because they have broken it. Thus the law is properly considered as the rule of right; and,
unless God had given some such means of discovering what Sin is, the darkened heart of man
could never have formed an adequate conception of it. For, as an acknowledged straight edge is
the only way in which the straightness or crookedness of a line can be determined, so the moral
obliquity of human actions can only be determined by the law of God; that rule of right which
proceeds from his own immaculate holiness.
GILL, “Therefore by the deeds of the law,.... Hence it most clearly appears, that there can
be no justification before God by the law, since it stops the mouths of men, and pronounces
them guilty: by "the deeds of the law" are meant, works done in obedience to it, as performed by
sinful men, which are very imperfect; not as performed by Adam in innocence or by Christ in
our nature whose works were perfect; but as performed by sinful men and of themselves, and
not as performed in and by Christ for them who is the fulfilling end of the law for righteousness
to all believers: now by such works as these whether wrought before or after conversion, with or

without the strength and grace of Christ,
there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: that is, no one person: "flesh" designs men,
and men as corrupt and carnal, in opposition to God, who is a Spirit pure and holy; and may
have respect to the vain opinion of Jews and Gentiles, who were vainly puffed up in their fleshly
mind; the one on account of their wisdom and learning, the other on account of their
righteousness; and includes all the individuals of human nature:, the word "justified", does not
signify being made righteous by the infusion of righteousness, for the infusion of a
righteousness, or holiness, is sanctification, which is a work of the Spirit of God, is internal, and
imperfect, and so not justifying; but it is a forensic word, or legal term, and stands opposed to a
being condemned; and signifies to be acquitted, discharged, and made righteous in a legal sense,
which can never be done by an imperfect obedience to the law: men may be justified hereby in
their own sight, and in the sight of others, but not in "his sight"; in the sight of God, who is
omniscient, and sees not as man seeth; who is pure, holy, and righteous, and whose judgment is
according to truth: this is said in direct contradiction to the Jews (z), who say,
"a man is not justified for ever, but by the words of the law:''
but in his sight none can be justified, but by the perfect obedience and righteousness of Christ.
The reason for it is,
for by the law is the knowledge of sin; it discovers to a man, by the light of the Spirit of
God, and as under his influence, and attended with his power, the sins both of his heart and life;
and so he is convinced by it as a transgressor and finds himself guilty, and liable to
condemnation and death; wherefore he can never hope for and expect justification by it. The
Jews ascribe such an use as this to the law, which they suppose it performs in a very gentle
manner;
"he that rises in the night (say they (a)), and studies in the law, cY pJcjsJi@w tJilJibjo i:Jlmv…J>yWJ
CyB…gJBaLWaJmLJvnCJvngJgnal:JEHmJaLmJnaJyJWy-JLDJRHfPC…am:JEHmJygJyJCLmv…?JCyB…gJBaLWaJmLJv…?JgLaJnaJ
m…af…?J>yaPHyP…,aaJ
EHmJmvngJngJP…a…?y>>-JfLa…JnaJyJ?LHPv…?JWy-:JDL?Jmv…J>yWJWL?BgJW?ymvTJ
&אדnןםלbונTherefore by the deeds of — obedience to
the law there shall no flesh be justified — that is, be held and treated as righteous; as is
plain from the whole scope and strain of the argument.
in his sight — at His bar (
Psa_143:2).
for by the law is the knowledge of sin — (See on Rom_4:15; see on Rom_7:7; and see on
1Jo_3:4).
Note, How broad and deep does the apostle in this section lay the foundations of his great
doctrine of Justification by free grace - in the disorder of man’s whole nature, the consequent
universality of human guilt, the condemnation, by reason of the breach of divine law, of the
whole world, and the impossibility of justification before God by obedience to that violated law!

Only when these humiliating conclusions are accepted and felt, are we in a condition to
appreciate and embrace the grace of the Gospel, next to be opened up.
gtsFo 9v420.Therefore by the works of the law, etc. It is a matter of doubt, even among the learned, what
the works of the law mean. Some extend them to the observance of the whole law, while others confine
them to the ceremonies alone. The addition of the word law induced [Chrysostom
] [Origen ], and [Jerome ]
to assent to the latter opinion;
(106) for they thought that there is a peculiar intimation in this appendage,
that the expression should not be understood as including all works. But this difficulty may be very easily
removed: for seeing works are so far just before God as we seek by them to render to him worship and
obedience, in order expressly to take away the power of justifying from all works, he has mentioned those, if
there be any, which can possibly justify; for the law hath promises, without which there would be no value in
our works before God. You hence see the reason why Paul expressly mentioned the works of the law; for it
is by the law that a REWARD
is apportioned to works. Nor was this unknown to the schoolmen, who held
it as an approved and common maxim, that works have no intrinsic worthiness, but become meritorious by
covenant. And though they were mistaken, inasmuch as they saw not that works are ever polluted with
vices, which deprive them of any merit, yet this principle is still true, that the reward for works depends on
the free promise of the law. Wisely then and rightly does Paul speak here; for he speaks not of mere works,
but distinctly and expressly refers to the keeping of the law, the SUBJECT which he is discussing. (107)
As to those things which have been adduced by learned men in defense of this opinion, they are weaker
than they might have been. They think that by mentioning circumcision, an example is propounded, which
belonged to ceremonies only: but why Paul mentioned circumcision, we have already explained; for none
swell more with confidence in works than hypocrites, and we know that they glory only in external masks;
and then circumcision, according to their view, was a sort of initiation into the righteousness of the law; and
hence it seemed to them a work of primary excellence, and indeed the basis as it were of the righteousness
of works. — They also allege what is said in the Epistle to the Galatians, where Paul handles the same
subject, and refers to ceremonies only; but that also is not sufficiently strong to support what they wish to
defend. It is certain that Paul had a controversy with those who inspired the people with a false confidence in
ceremonies; that he might cut of this confidence, he did not confine himself to ceremonies, nor did he speak
specifically of what value they were; but he included the whole law, as it is evident from those passages
which are derived from that source. Such also was the character of the disputation held at Jerusalem by the
disciples.
But we contend, not without reason, that Paul speaks here of the whole law; for we are abundantly
supported by the thread of reasoning which he has hitherto followed and CONTINUES to follow, and
there are many other passages which will not allow us to think otherwise. It is therefore a truth, which
deserves to be remembered as the first in importance, — that by keeping the law no one can attain
righteousness. He had before assigned the reason, and he will repeat it presently again, and that is, that all,
being to a man guilty of transgression, are condemned for unrighteousness by the law. And these two things
— to be justified by works — and to be guilty of transgressions, (as we shall show more at large as we
proceed,) are wholly inconsistent the one with the other. — The word flesh, without some particular
specification, signifies men;
(108) though it seems to convey a meaning somewhat more general, as it is
more expressive to say, “ mortals,” than to say, “ men,” as you may see in Gallius.
For by the law, etc. He reasons from what is of an opposite character, — that righteousness is not brought to
us by the law, because it convinces us of sin and condemns us; FOR LIFE
and death proceed not from
the same fountain. And as he reasons from the contrary effect of the law, that it cannot confer righteousness
on us, let us know, that the argument does not otherwise hold good, except we hold this as an inseparable
and unvarying circumstance, — that by showing to man his sin, it cuts off the hope of salvation. It is indeed
by itself, as it teaches us what righteousness is, the way to salvation: but our depravity and corruption
prevent it from being in this respect of any advantage to us. It is also necessary in the second place to add
this, — that whosoever is found to be a sinner, is deprived of righteousness; for to devise with the sophisters

a half kind of righteousness, so that works in part justify, is frivolous: but nothing is in this respect gained, on
account of man’ corruption.
(106)
The original is “ut in priorem opinionem concederent :” but the context shows clearly that “priorem “ is
a misprint for “posteriorem. In addition to the authors mentioned here may be added [Ambrose
] [Theodoret ]
[Pelagius ] [Erasmus ] and [Grotius ] And yet, notwithstanding all those authorities, the opinion referred to is
wholly inconsistent with the reasoning of the Apostle here and throughout the whole Epistle. It has indeed
been given up as untenable by modern authors of the same school, such as [Locke ] [Whitby ] and
[Macknight ]
To disprove this notion it is sufficient to notice the sins which the Apostle had referred to; they are not those
against the ceremonial but the moral law, and it is because the moral law is transgressed that it cannot
justify.
“ there be any law which man has perfectly kept, he may doubtless be justified by it; and surely no man can
be justified by a law which condemns him for breaking it. But there is no law of God which any man has
kept; therefore no law by the deeds of which a man can be justified. The Gentile broke the law of his reason
and conscience; the Jew broke the moral law; and even the attempt to justify himself by observing the
ceremonial law, contradicted the very nature and intent of it.” — [Scott
]
(107)
The argument and the reasoning of the Apostle seem to require that ἐξ ἔργων νό\ου should be
rendered here literally, “ works of law,” without the article, as the word “” seems here, according to the drift of
the argument, to mean law in general, both natural and revealed; and
διὰ νό\ου in the next clause must be
regarded as having the same meaning; the law of nature as well as the written law, though not to the same
extent, makes sin known. This is the view taken by [Pareus
] [Doddridge ] [Macknight ] [Stuart ] and
[Haldane ]. — Ed.
(108)
The expression is ὀυ πᾶσα σὰρξ — not all, that is, not any flesh, etc.; the word πᾶσα like לכ in
Hebrew, is used here in the sense of “” The sentence bears a resemblance to what is contained
in Psa_143:2, “ justified before thee shall not all living,” or, not any one living, יח לכ אל. The sentence here is
literally, “ by works of law shall not be justified any flesh before Him.” —Ed.
gktWsedvdoaeh , “OUR VIOLATIONS OF EVERY COMMANDMENT
Rom_3:20. By the law is the knowledge of sin.
OUR lost estate, and our consequent need of a Saviour, can never be truly known, unless we compare our
lives with that universal rule of duty, the law of God. St. Paul took this method of proving that both Jews and
Gentiles were under sin: in all the preceding part of this epistle he sets forth their transgressions against the
law; and having CONFIRMED
his assertions by many passages out of the old Testament, he says in the
verse before my text, “We know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them that are under the law,
that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God.” From hence it is evident that
the law of which he is speaking, is the moral law, that same law which was originally engraven in the heart of
Adam, and was afterwards published to the world on Mount Sinai: for the Gentiles having never been
subject to the ceremonial or judicial law, it can be no other than the moral law, which shuts their
mouth and
brings them
in guilty before God. The principal ends for which he referred them to this law were these; first,
to convince them that they could not be justified by their obedience to it (and therefore in the words
immediately preceding our text, he says, that by the law shall no flesh be justified;) and secondly, to shew

them their undone condition by the law; and therefore he adds, in the words of our text, “by the law is the
knowledge of sin.”
From these words we shall take occasion to compare our lives with the law of God, that so we may obtain
the knowledge of our sins: and while we are thus bringing our iniquities to remembrance, may the Spirit of
God come down upon us, to convince us all of sin, and to reveal unto us that only Deliverer from sin, the
Lord Jesus Christ!
The law was delivered to Moses upon two tables of stone, and comprised in ten commandments.
The first of the commandments respects the object
of our worship, “Thou shalt have none other gods but
me.” In this we are required to believe in God, to love him, and to serve him with all our hearts, and minds,
and souls, and strength: and if we examine ourselves by it, we shall see that our transgressions are neither
few nor small: for instead of believing in him at all times, how rarely have we either trembled at his
threatenings or confided in his promises! Instead of loving him supremely, have we not set our affections on
the things of time and sense? Instead of fearing him above all, have we not been swayed rather by the fear
of man, or a regard to our worldly interests? Instead of relying on him in all difficulties, have we not rather
“leaned to our own understanding, and trusted in an arm of flesh?” and instead of making it our meat and
drink to do his
will, have we not lived to ourselves, seeking our own pleasure, and following our own ways?
Surely if we seriously inquire into our past conduct, we shall find that throughout our whole lives “other lords
have had dominion over us,” the world has been our idol, and self has usurped the throne of God. If
therefore we were to be tried by this commandment only, our offences would appear exceeding numerous,
more than the hairs of our head, more than the sands upon the sea shore.
The second commandment respects the nature
of worship: “Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven
image.” God is a Spirit, and therefore is not to be addressed by the medium of any sensible object, but is to
be “worshipped in spirit and in truth.” Yet, whenever we have presented ourselves before him, we have
scarcely paid him more respect, yea frequently much less, than the heathens manifest towards their gods of
wood and stone. Let us only consider what has been the frame of our minds when we have approached the
throne of grace; how little have we stood in awe of his Majesty! How unaffecting has been our sense either
of our wants, or of his power
and readiness to help us! And if we look at the prayers which we have offered, we shall see cause to
acknowledge that they have been dull, formal, and hypocritical. Our confessions have neither been attended
with humility nor followed by amendment: our petitions have been without faith and without fervour: and our
thanksgivings, which should have been the warm effusions of a grateful heart, have frozen on our very lips.
Indeed secret prayer is by the generality either wholly omitted, or performed as a task or drudgery: as for
family devotions they are wholly, and almost universally, neglected: and in the public assemblies, instead of
breathing out our hearts before God, our thoughts are wandering to the ends of the earth, or, as the

Scripture has said, “we draw nigh unto God with our mouth, but our heart is far from him.” Let us all
therefore consult the records of our own consciences, that we may judge ourselves with respect to these
things; nor let us forget that every such omission and every such defect has swelled the number of our
transgressions, and greatly aggravated our guilt and misery.
The third commandment respects the manner
of worship; “Thou shall not take the name of the Lord thy God
in vain.” The name of God is never to be uttered by us but with awe and reverence. But, not to mention the
stupid indifference with which it is often repeated in prayer, how generally, how daringly
is it profaned in
common conversation, so generally, that no age, sex, or quality is exempt from this impious custom; and
so daringly, that it is even vindicated: the thoughtless manner in which that sacred name is used, is often
urged as an excuse for the profanation of it; when it is that very thoughtlessness which constitutes the
profanation. But instead of extenuating the guilt of this sin, we shall do well to consider what God has said
respecting it, “The Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.”
The fourth commandment respects the time
of worship; “Remember the sabbath*day to keep it holy.” In what
manner we are to keep it holy, the Prophet Isaiah teaches us [Note: Isa_58:13.]; “Turn away thy foot from
the sabbath, from doing thy
pleasure on my holy day, and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord,
honourable; and honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine
own words.” But how has this day been regarded by us? Have we conscientiously devoted it to God, and
spent those sacred hours in reading, meditation and prayer? Have we, as well by example as by precept,
inculcated on our dependants a regard for the sabbath? and have we improved it for the welfare of their
souls as well as of our own? alas! have not those blessed seasons been rather wasted in worldly business,
worldly company, and worldly pleasures? Yes, it is to be feared that however we may have kept up a mere
formal attendance on the external services of the Church, we have not any of us accounted our sabbaths a
delight, or spent them in devout and holy exercises. We may rest assured however, that of every such abuse
of the sabbath we shall give a strict ACCOUNT
; for if God has so solemnly warned us to “remember that
we keep the sabbath holy,” no doubt he himself will remember what regard we payed to it.
Here end the commandments of the first table, which relate to God, as those of the second table relate more
especially to our neighbour; yet not so entirely as to exclude ourselves. We proceed therefore with them:—
The fifth commandment, “Honour thy father and thy mother,” requires a becoming deportment not only
towards our own immediate parents, but towards all mankind, however related to us; our superiors, equals,
and inferiors: to the first of these we owe submission; to the two last, love and condescension. But how often
have we affected independence, and refused submission to lawful authority! How often have we envied the
advancement of our equals, or exalted ourselves above them! How often have we treated our inferiors with
haughtiness and severity! Even our natural parents we have by no means honoured as we ought, nor
sustained any relation in life as God has required us to do. In all these respects therefore we have sinned
before God, and “treasured up wrath for ourselves against the day of wrath.”

Thus far many will readily acknowledge themselves guilty. But so ignorant are mankind in GENERAL of
the spirituality and extent of God’s law, that they account themselves blameless with respect to all the other
commandments: if they have not literally, and in the grossest sense, committed murder, adultery, theft, or
perjury, they have no conception how they can have transgressed the laws which forbid these things. But let
us calmly and dispassionately examine this matter; bearing this in mind, that it is our interest to know our
sins;
because by knowing them, we shall be stirred up to seek the forgiveness of them through the Saviour’s
blood; whereas, if we remain ignorant of our sins, we shall not feel our need of a Saviour, and shall
consequently die without an interest in him.
The sixth commandment then respects our own and our neighbour’s life;
“Thou shalt do no murder.” We
take for granted that none of us have imbrued our hands in human blood: yet this by no means exempts us
from the charge of murder. Our Lord, in that justly admired Sermon on the Mount, has given us the clew,
whereby we may be led to a true exposition of this and of all the other commandments; “Ye have heard,”
says he, “that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill, and whosoever shall kill shall be in
danger of the judgment; but I say unto you, that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be
in danger of the judgment, and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council;
but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.” By this comment of our Lord’s, we are
assured that causeless anger and passion are esteemed by him as violations of this commandment. And St.
John in the third chapter of his first epistle confirms this by saying, “He that loveth not his brother abideth in
death; whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer; and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in
him.” From this additional testimony therefore we see that the hating of any person, or the not truly loving
him, is a species of murder in the sight of God. Who then is innocent? Who has been free from passion?
Who has not often conceived anger and hatred against his neighbour? And shall it be thought unreasonable
to call this murder? Look at the effects of anger; how often has it terminated in murder, when the
perpetrators of the act little supposed themselves capable of such an atrocious crime! and if we have been
irritated and provoked by small occasions, who can tell what our anger might have effected if the occasion
had been increased, and the preventing grace of God withdrawn? And what is that which the world has
falsely called a sense of honour? ’tis revenge, ’tis murder; murder in the heart, as it often proves murder in
the act. But there are other ways of committing murder: if we have wished a rival dead, in order that we
might be advanced; if we have wished an enemy dead, because of our aversion to him; if we have wished a
relation or any other person dead, in order that we might succeed to his fortune or preferment, or if we have
rejoiced in the death of another on any of these ACCOUNTS
, we have manifested that same principle in
our hearts, which, if kindled by temptation and favoured by opportunity, would have produced the most fatal
effects. Nor is this all: we are no less guilty in the sight of God, if we do what tends to the destruction of our
own life, than if we seek the destruction of our neighbour’s life. Not to mention therefore the too common act
of suicide, how many bring upon themselves pain, sickness, and disease, I may add too, an early and
premature death, by means of debauchery and excess. Let not any one therefore imagine himself innocent
even in respect of murder: for in every instance of anger, impatience, or intemperance, yea, whenever we

have wished for, or rejoiced in another’s dissolution, we have violated this commandment.
The seventh commandment respects our own and our neighbour’s chastity:
“Thou shalt not commit
adultery.” Fornication and adultery are by many practised without remorse, and recorded without shame. But
to such we may well address the words of Solomon: “Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth, and let thy heart
cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart and in the sight of thine eyes; but
know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment.” Nor will it avail any thing to say, that
we committed these sins only in our youth; and that now we have left them off; for sin is sin, whensoever
and by whomsoever committed; and however it may have escaped our memory, it is not therefore erased
from the book of God’s remembrance; nor however partial the world may be in its judgment respecting it, will
it escape due notice at another tribunal; for we are assured by the Apostle, that “whoremongers and
adulterers God will judge.”
But this commandment extends much further than to the outward act: it reaches to the inmost thoughts and
desires of the heart. Let us hear an infallible expositor; let us hear what our Lord himself says in his Sermon
on the Mount: “Ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: but
I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her
already in his heart” By this commandment therefore is forbidden all indulgence of unclean thoughts, and
consequently all immodest words, all obscene allusions, all wanton looks, all impure desires and affections.
Who then will say, I am pure? Who will take up a stone to cast at another?
The eighth commandment respects our neighbour’s goods;
“Thou shalt not steal.” Theft is universally
branded with disgrace: and it may be hoped that we, who have been so far out of the reach of want, have
never been reduced to so infamous a practice. Yet how many are guilty of practices equally repugnant to the
spirit of this commandment! How many defraud the government by withholding or evading the legal imposts!
How many defraud the public by circulating coin which they know to be either base or defective! How many
defraud those with whom they transact business, by taking undue advantage of their ease, their ignorance,
or their necessities! How many defraud their creditors by neglecting to pay their debts! And how many
defraud the poor by not giving to them what the Great Proprietor of all hath made their due! If indeed we
regard only these effects
of dishonesty, they will probably appear to us light and insignificant; but if we look
to the principle
which gives birth to these things, it will BE FOUND
no less corrupt than that which
manifests itself in theft and robbery. Odious therefore as the imputation of fraud may justly be considered,
there is not one who has not at some time or other been guilty of it: so that this commandment as well as all
that have preceded it, will accuse us before God.
The ninth commandment respects our neighbour’s reputation;
“Thou shall not bear false witness.” We
offend against this law, not only when we perjure ourselves before a magistrate, but whenever we
misrepresent the conduct of others, or pass hasty and ungrounded censures upon them. All whisperers
therefore and backbiters, and all who circulate reports injurious to their neighbour, are condemned by it: nor

does it forbid such falsehoods only as are pernicious, but such also as are jocular, marvellous, or
exculpative: for, as to the morality of the act, it matters little whether we falsify to
our neighbour,
or against
him. Who then has not been often guilty in these respects? Who does not feel the force of the
Psalmist’s observation, that “as soon as we are born we go astray, speaking lies?” Nor let any think lightly of
this sin: for so detestable is it in the sight of God, that he has given us this solemn warning, “All liars shall
have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
The tenth commandment, “Thou shall not covet,” is perhaps the most extensive of any; because while the
others forbid the indulgence of any sinful act, this forbids the first risings of desireafter any sinful object: it
utterly condemns the least motions of discontent at our own lot, or of envy at the lot of others. It was this
commandment which first wounded the conscience of the Apostle Paul; he was in all points relating to the
ceremonial law, and ACCORDING
to the letter of the moral law, blameless; and he conceived that he
must therefore of necessity be in a state of salvation: but this good opinion of his state arose from his
ignorance of the spirituality and extent of the law: and when his eyes were once opened to see that the law
condemned him for the first risings of evil as well as for the actual commission of it, he became guilty in his
own sight, and acknowledged the justice of his condemnation. Thus he says of himself; “I had not known sin
but by the law; for I had not known lust (i. e. the evil and danger of it) unless the law had said, Thou shall not
covet: for I was alive without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died.” The
plain meaning of which is this: before he understood the spiritualily of the law he thought himself safe; but
when that was revealed to him, he saw himself justly condemned for his offences against it. May that same,
that salutary, conviction be wrought also in our hearts! for our Lord has told us, that “the whole need not a
physician, but they that are sick;” plainly intimating thereby, that we must feel our need of him, before we
shall be willing to receive his saving benefits. Though therefore we may think as highly of our state as the
Apostle did of his, yet if we feel not our condemnation by the law, we shall but deceive ourselves; and
though we be possessed of his knowledge, zeal, and holiness, yet shall we, like him, be “dead in trespasses
and sins:” for till we be indeed weary and heavy laden with a sense of sin, we never shall, nor ever can,
come unto Christ for rest.
To conclude—
If, while we have been surveying the duties of the first table, we have called to mind our low esteem for God,
together with the unnumbered instances wherein we have neglected his worship, misemployed his
sabbaths, and profaned his name; if in examining the duties of the second table, we have remembered our
several violations of them, both generally, by misconduct in the different relations of life, and particularly, by
anger and intemperance, by actual or mental impurity, by dishonesty or want of liberality, by wilful and
allowed falsehood, by discontent with our own lot, or coveting of another’s, surely we shall confess with the
Psalmist, that “our iniquities are grown up unto heaven, they are a sore burthen too heavy for us to bear.”
We shall see also with how great propriety the compilers of our Liturgy have directed us to cry after every
commandment, “Lord, have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law.”

To make us thus cry out for mercy is the proper use of the law; for the Apostle says, “The law is our
schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ.” And if we once obtain this view of the law, and by it the knowledge of
our sins, we shall then have the best preservative against errors: for instead of making the divinity of Christ
and his atonement a matter of mere speculative inquiry, we shall see that we have no safety but in his blood,
no acceptance but in his righteousness. We shall then “count all things but loss for the excellency of the
knowledge of Christ,” and shall each of us be like*minded with that great Apostle who said, “I desire to be
found in Christ, not having mine own righteousness which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of
Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith.”
iylWmnh IsαtSSsg;,sSvJsFp,wIsCwsgpsw;pJs:ws;pJswC.dul we are. Paul has been quoting from the sacred
Scriptures; and truly, they shed a lurid light upon the condition of human nature. The light can show us our
sin; but it cannot take it away. The law of the LorFsCwsSCὗ,svsSppὗC.GΤGSvwwTs pJIsvsSppὗC.GΤGSvwwsCwsa capital
thing for finding out where the spots are on your face; but you cannot wash in a looking.glass, you cannot get
rid of the spots by looking in the glass. The law is intended to show a man how much he needs cleansing; but
the law cannot cleanse him. "By the law is the knowledge of sin." The law proves that we are condemned, but
it does not bring us our pardon.
εn WoIsαeTsP:jg;,jsgpsFjCA,s:wspddsdjpEs,άM,BgC.Gs:ustification by the law, he ascribes this conviction to the
law (v. 20): For by the law is the knowledge of sin. That law which convicts and condemns us can never justify
us. The law is the straight rule, that rectum which is index sui et obliqui..that which points out the right and
the wrong; it is the proper use and intendment of the law to open our wound, and therefore not likely to be
the remedy. That which is searching is not sanative. Those that would know sin must get the knowledge of the
law in its strictness, extent, and spiritual nature. If we compare our own hearts and lives with the rule, we
shall discover wherein we have turned aside. Paul makes this use of the law, ch. vii. 9, Therefore by the deeds
of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sightTshνw,jA,IsὐθTτs psdS,w;sw;vSSsν,s::wgCdC,FIs.psEv., no corrupted
man (Gen. vi. 3), for that he also is flesh, sinful and depraved; therefore not justified, because we are flesh.
The corruption that remains in our nature will for ever obstruct any justification by our own works, which,
coming from flesh, must needs taste of the cask, JoνsάCATsωTsὐίTτs pgs::wgCdC,FsC.s;CwswCG;gTsε,sFp,wsnot deny that
justification which was by the deeds of the law in the sight of the church: they were, in their church.estate, as
embodied in a polity, a holy people, a nation of priests; but as the conscience stands in relation to God, in his
sight, we cannot be justified by the deeds of the law. The apostle refers to Ps. cxliii. 2.
II. He argues from God's glory to prove that justification must be expected only by faith in Christ's
righteousness. There is no justification by the works of the law. Must guilty man then remain eternally under
wrath? Is there no hope? Is the wound become incuraνS,sν,Bv:w,spdsgjv.wGj,wwCp.πs pIsνS,ww,Fsν,smpFIsCt is
not (v. 21, 22); there is another way laid open for us, the righteousness of God without the law is manifested
now under the gospel. Justification may be obtained without the keeping of Moses's law: and this is called the
righteousness of God, righteousness of his ordaining, and providing, and accepting,..righteousness which he
confers upon us; as the Christian armour is called the armour of God, Eph. vi. 11.
θT pJsBp.B,j.C.Gsg;CwsjCG;g,p:w.,wwspdsmpFspνw,jA,I (1.) That it is manifested. The gospel.way of
justification is a high.way, a plain way, it is laid open for us: the brazen serpent is lifted up upon the pole; we
are not left to grope our way in the dark, but it is manifested to us. (2.) It is without the law. Here he obviates
the method of the judaizing Christians, who would needs join Christ and Moses together..owning Christ for
the Messiah, and yet too fondly retaining the law, keeping up the ceremonies of it, and imposing it upon the
Gentile converts: no, says he, it is without the law. The righteousness that Christ hath brought in is a complete
righteousness. (3.) Yet it is witnessed by the law and the prophets; that is, there were types, and prophecies,
and promises, in the Old Testament, that pointed at this. The law is so far from justifying us that it directs us

to another way of justification, points at Christ as our righteousness, to whom bear all the prophets witness.
See Acts x. 43. This might recommend it to the Jews, who were so fond of the law and the prophets. (4.) It is
by the faith of Jesus Christ, that faith which hath Jesus Christ for its object..an anointed Saviour, so Jesus
Christ signifies. Justifying faith respects Christ as a Saviour in all his three anointed offices, as prophet,
priest, and king..trusting in him, accepting of him, and adhering to him, in all these. It is by this that we
become interested in that righteousness which God has ordained, and which Christ has brought in. (5.) It is to
all, and upon all, those that believe. In this expression he inculcates that which he had been often harping
upon, that Jews and Gentiles, if they believe, stand upon the same level, and are alike welcome to God
through Christ; for there is no difference. Or, it is eis pantas..to all, offered to all in general; the gospel
excludes none that do not exclude themselves; but it is epi pantas tous pisteuontas, upon all that believe, not
only tendered to them, but put upon them as a crown, as a robe; they are, upon their believing, interested in
it, and entitled to all the benefits and privileges of it.
21 But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has
been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets
testify.
?tW ed5v,But now - The apostle, having shown the entire failure of all attempts to be
justified by the “Law,” whether among Jews or Gentiles, proceeds to state fully the plan of
justification by Jesus Christ in the gospel. To do this, was the main design of the Epistle,
Rom_1:17. He makes, therefore, in the close of this chapter, an explicit statement of the nature
of the doctrine; and in the following parts of the Epistle he fully proves it, and illustrates its
effects.
The righteousness of God - God’s plan of justifying people; see the note at Rom_1:17.
Without the law - In a way different from personal obedience to the Law. It does not mean
that God abandoned his Law; or that Jesus Christ did not regard the Law, for he came to
“magnify” it Isa_42:21; or that sinners after they are justified have no regard to the Law; but it
means simply what the apostle had been endeavoring to show, that justification could not be
accomplished by personal obedience to any law of Jew or Gentile, and that it must be
accomplished in some other way.
Being witnessed - Being borne witness to. It was not a new doctrine; it was found in the Old
Testament. The apostle makes this observation with special reference to the Jews. He does not
declare any new thing, but that which was rally declared in their own sacred writings.
By the law - This expression here evidently denotes, as it did commonly among the Jews, the
five books of Moses. And the apostle means to say that this doctrine was found in those books;
not that it was in the Ten Commandments, or in the Law, strictly so called. It is not a part of
“law” to declare justification except by strict and perfect obedience. That it was found “in” those
books; the apostle shows by the case of Abraham; Rom. 4; see also his reasoning on Lev_18:5;
Deu_30:12-14, in Rom_10:5-11; compare Exo_34:6-7.
And the prophets - Generally, the remainder of the Old Testament. The phrase “the Law
and the prophets” comprehended the whole of the Old Testament; Mat_5:17; Mat_11:13;
Mat_22:40; Act_13:15; Act_28:23. That this doctrine was contained in the prophets, the apostle
showed by the passage quoted from Hab_2:4, in Rom_1:17, “The just shall live by faith.” The

same thing he showed in Rom_10:11, from Isa_28:16; Isa_49:23; Rom_4:6-8, from Psa_32:1-
11. The same thing is fully taught in Isa_53:11; Dan_9:24. Indeed, the general tenor of the Old
Testament - the appointment of sacrifices, etc. taught that man was a sinner, and that he could
not be justified by obedience to the moral law.
CLARKE, “But now the righteousness of God - God’s method of saving sinners is now
shown, by the Gospel, to be through his own mere mercy, by Christ Jesus; without the law -
without any right or claim which might result from obedience to the law; and is evidently that
which was intended by God from the beginning; for it is witnessed by the law and the prophets -
the rites and ceremonies of the one, and the preachings and predictions of the others, all bearing
testimony to the great design of God, and to the absolute necessity there was for the sacrifice
and salvation which God has provided.
GILL, “But now the righteousness of God,.... The apostle having proved that all men are
unrighteous, and that no man can be justified in the sight of God by his obedience, either to the
law of nature or of Moses, proceeds to give an account of that righteousness, which does justify
before God; and so returns to his former subject,
Rom_1:17, concerning "the righteousness of
God", the revelation of which he makes to be peculiar to the Gospel, as he does here; since he
says, that it
without the law is manifested: meaning, either that this righteousness is without the law,
and the deeds of it, as performed by sinful men; or that the manifestation of it is without the law,
either of nature or of Moses; for the law discovers sin, but not a righteousness which justifies
from sin; it shows what righteousness is, but does not direct the sinner where there is one to be
had, that will make him righteous in the sight of God: this is made known without the law, and
only in the Gospel:
being witnessed by the law and the prophets; a testimony is borne to the justifying
righteousness of Christ both "by the law", particularly in the five books of Moses; which testify of
Christ, of his obedience, sufferings, and death, by which he brought in life and righteousness;
see Gen_3:15, compared with Dan_9:24; and Gen_15:6 with Rom_4:9; and Gen_22:18 with
Gal_3:8; and Deu_30:11 with Rom_10:5. And the prophets; Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, and
others; see Isa_42:21.
'jsJtE <He argues from God's glory to prove that justification must be expected only by faith
in Christ's righteousness. There is no justification by the works of the law. Must guilty man then
remain eternally under wrath? Is there no hope? Is the wound become incurable because of
transgression? No, blessed be God, it is not (Rom_3:21, Rom_3:22); there is another way laid
open for us, the righteousness of God without the law is manifested now under the gospel.
Justification may be obtained without the keeping of Moses's law: and this is called the
righteousness of God, righteousness of his ordaining, and providing, and accepting, -
righteousness which he confers upon us; as the Christian armour is called the armour of God,
Eph_6:11.
1. Now concerning this righteousness of God observe, (1.) That it is manifested. The gospel-
way of justification is a high-way, a plain way, it is laid open for us: the brazen serpent is lifted

up upon the pole; we are not left to grope our way in the dark, but it is manifested to us. (2.) It is
without the law. Here he obviates the method of the judaizing Christians, who would needs join
Christ and Moses together - owning Christ for the Messiah, and yet too fondly retaining the law,
keeping up the ceremonies of it, and imposing it upon the Gentile converts: no, says he, it is
without the law. The righteousness that Christ hath brought in is a complete righteousness. (3.)
Yet it is witnessed by the law and the prophets; that is, there were types, and prophecies, and
promises, in the Old Testament, that pointed at this. The law is so far from justifying us that it
directs us to another way of justification, points at Christ as our righteousness, to whom bear all
the prophets witness. See Act_10:43. This might recommend it to the Jews, who were so fond of
the law and the prophets. (4.) It is by the faith of Jesus Christ, that faith which hath Jesus Christ
for its object - an anointed Saviour, so Jesus Christ signifies. Justifying faith respects Christ as a
Saviour in all his three anointed offices, as prophet, priest, and king-trusting in him, accepting
of him, and adhering to him, in all these. It is by this that we become interested in that
righteousness which God has ordained, and which Christ has brought in. (5.) It is to all, and
upon all, those that believe. In this expression he inculcates that which he had been often
harping upon, that Jews and Gentiles, if they believe, stand upon the same level, and are alike
welcome to God through Christ; for there is no difference. Or, it is
gcjWpOrAOj - to all, offered all in
general; the gospel excludes none that do not exclude themselves; but it is
AvWgpcWpOrAOjWAvΤjW
piseuonta
, upon all that believe, not only tendered to them, but put upon them as a crown, as a
robe; they are, upon their believing, interested in it, and entitled to all the benefits and privileges
of it.
Htarih sίθΤίeIsα
Rom_3:21-26. God’s justifying righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ,
alike adapted to our necessities and worthy of himself.
But now the righteousness of God — (See on Rom_1:17).
without the law — that is, a righteousness to which our obedience to the law contributes
nothing whatever (Rom_3:28; Gal_2:16).
is manifested, being witnessed — attested.
by the law and the prophets — the Old Testament Scriptures. Thus this justifying
righteousness, though new, as only now fully disclosed, is an old righteousness, predicted and
foreshadowed in the Old Testament.
bt?(r Isα21.But now without the law, etc. It is not certain for what distinct reason he calls that the
righteousness of God, which we obtain by faith; whether it be, because it can alone stand before God, or
because the Lord in his mercy confers it on us. As both interpretations are suitable, we contend for neither.
This righteousness then, which God communicates to man, and accepts alone, and owns as righteousness,
has been revealed, he says,without the law, that is without the aid of the law; and the law is to be
understood as meaning works; for it is not proper to refer this to its teaching, which he immediately adduces
as bearing witness to the gratuitous righteousness of faith. Some confine it to ceremonies; but this view I
shall presently show to be unsound and frigid. We ought then to know, that the merits of works are excluded.
We also see that he blends not works with the mercy of God; but having taken away and wholly removed all
confidence in works, he sets up mercy alone.
It is not unknown to me, that [Augustine
] gives a different explanation; for he thinks that the righteousness
of God is the grace of regeneration; and this grace he allows to be free, because God renews us, when
unworthy, by his Spirit; and from this he excludes the works of the law, that is, those works, by which men of
themselves endeavor, without renovation, to render God indebted to them. (Deum promereri
— to oblige

God.) I also well know, that some new speculators proudly adduce this sentiment, as though it were at this
day revealed to them. But that the Apostle includes all works without exception, even those which the Lord
produces in his own people, is evident from the context.
For no doubt Abraham was regenerated and led by the Spirit of God at the time when he denied that he was
justified by works. Hence he excluded from man’ justification not only works morally good, as they commonly
call them, and such as are done by the impulse of nature, but also all those which even the faithful can
perform.
(110) Again, since this is a definition of the righteousness of faith, “ are they whose iniquities are
forgiven,” there is no question to be made about this or that kind of work; but the merit of works being
abolished, the remission of sins alone is set down as the cause of righteousness.
They think that these two things well AGREE
, — that man is justified by faith through the grace of Christ,
— and that he is yet justified by the works, which proceed from spiritual regeneration; for God gratuitously
renews us, and we also receive his gift by faith. But Paul takes up a very different principle, — that the
consciences of men will never be tranquillized until they recumb on the mercy of God alone.
(111) Hence, in
another place, after having taught us that God is in Christ justifying men, he expresses the manner, — “ not
imputing to them their sins.” In like manner, in his Epistle to the Galatians, he puts the law in opposition to
faith with regard to justification; for the law promises life to those who do what it commands, (Gal_3:12;) and
it requires not only the outward performance of works, but also sincere love to God. It hence follows, that in
the righteousness of faith, no merit of works is allowed. It then appears evident, that it is but a frivolous
sophistry to say, that we are justified in Christ, because we are renewed by the Spirit, inasmuch as we are
the members of Christ, — that we are justified by faith, because we are united by faith to the body of Christ,
— that we are justified freely, because God finds nothing in us but sin.
But we are in Christ because we are out of ourselves; and justified by faith, because we must recumb on the
mercy of God alone, and on his gratuitous promises; andfreely, because God reconciles us to himself by
burying our sins. Nor can this indeed be confined to the commencement of justification, as they dream; for
this definition — “ are they whose iniquities are forgiven” — was applicable to David, after he had long
exercised himself in the service of God; and Abraham, thirty years after his call, though a remarkable
example of holiness, had yet no works for which he could glory before God, and hence his faith in the
promise was imputed to him for righteousness; and when Paul teaches us that God justifies men by not
imputing their sins, he QUOTES
a passage, which is daily repeated in the Church. Still more, the
conscience, by which we are disturbed on the score of works, performs its office, not for one day only, but
continues to do so through life. It hence follows that we cannot remain, even to death, in a justified state,
except we look to Christ only, in whom God has adopted us, and regards us now as accepted. Hence also is
their sophistry confuted, who falsely accuse us of asserting, that according to Scripture we are justified by
faith only, while the exclusive word only, is nowhere to BE FOUND in Scripture. But if justification
depends not either on the law, or on ourselves, why should it not be ascribed to mercy alone? and if it be
from mercy only, it is then by faith only.
The particle now may be taken adversatively, and not with reference to time; as we often
use now forbut.
(112) But if you prefer to regard it as an adverb of time, I willingly admit it, so that there may
be no room to suspect an evasion; yet the abrogation of ceremonies alone is not to be understood; for it was
only the design of the Apostle to illustrate by a comparison the grace by which we excel the fathers. Then
the meaning is, that by the preaching of the gospel, after the appearance of Christ in the flesh, the
righteousness of faith was revealed. It does not, however, hence follow, that it was hid before the coming of
Christ; for a twofold manifestation is to be here noticed: the first in the Old Testament, which was by the
word and sacraments; the other in the New, which contains the completion of ceremonies and promises, as
exhibited in Christ himself: and we may add, that by the gospel it has received a fuller brightness.
Being proved [or approved ] by the testimony,
(113) etc. He adds this, lest in the conferring of free
righteousness the gospel should seem to militate against the law. As then he has denied that the
righteousness of faith needs the aid of the law, so now he asserts that it is CONFIRMED
by its testimony.
If then the law affords its testimony to gratuitous righteousness, it is evident that the law was not given for

this end, to teach men how to obtain righteousness by works. Hence they pervert it, who turn it to answer
any purpose of this kind. And further, if you desire a proof of this truth, examine in order the chief things
taught by Moses, and you will find that man, being cast from the kingdom of God, had no other restoration
from the beginning than that contained in the evangelical promises through the blessed seed, by whom, as it
had been foretold, the serpent’ head was to be bruised, and through whom a blessing to the nations had
been promised: you will find in the commandments a demonstration of your iniquity, and from the sacrifices
and oblations you may learn that satisfaction and cleansing are to be obtained in Christ alone.
(114) When
you come to the Prophets you will find the clearest promises of gratuitous mercy. On this SUBJECT
see
my Institutes.
(110)
Professor [Hodge
] very justly observes, “ never was the doctrine of the Reformation, or of the
Lutheran and Calvinistic divines, that the imputation of righteousness affected the moral character of those
concerned. It is true,” he adds, “ God justifies he also sanctifies; but justification is not sanctification, and the
imputation of righteousness is not the infusion of righteousness.” — Ed.
(111)
“ foundation of your trust before God, must be either your own righteousness out and out, or the
righteousness of Christ out and out.... If you are to lean upon your own merit, lean upon it wholly — if you
are to lean upon Christ, lean upon him wholly. The two will not amalgamate together, and it is the attempt to
do so, which keeps many a weary and heavy*laden inquirer at a distance from rest, and at a distance from
the truth of the gospel. Maintain a clear and consistent posture. Stand not before God with one foot upon a
rock and the other upon a treacherous quicksand...We call upon you not to lean so much as the weight of
one grain or scruple of your confidence upon your own doings — to leave this ground entirely, and to come
over entirely to the ground of a Redeemer’ blood and a Redeemer’ righteousness.” — Dr. [Chalmers
]
(112)
“ words but now may be regarded merely as marking the transition from one paragraph to another, or
as a designation of tense; now, i.e., under the gospel dispensation. In favor of this view is the phrase, “
declare at this time his righteousness, Rom_3:26.” — [Hodge
]
(113)
“Testimonio comprobata,” etc., so [Beza
] and [Pareus ] render \αρτυρου\ένη “ attested,”
[Doddridge ] ; “ testified,” [Macknight ] [Schleusner ] gives a paraphrase, “ predicted and promised;” and this
no doubt is the full meaning. — Ed.
(114)
Concurrent with what is said here is this striking and condensed passage from [Scott
] — “ has been
witnessed by the law and the Prophets; the ceremonies typified it; the very strictness of the moral law and its
awful curses, being compared with the promises of mercy to sinners, implied it; the promises and predictions
of the Messiah bore witness to it; the faith and hope of ancient believers recognized it; and the whole Old
Testament, rightly understood, taught men to expect and depend on it.” — Ed.

PULPIT, “
But now
the righteousness of God without law (i.e. apart from law) is (or, has
been) manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the prop hets . On the essential meaning
of God's righteousness ( Θεοῦ δικαιοσύνη ), see on Rom_1:17, and Introduction. This passage, in which the
thesis of Rom_1:17 is formally enunciated, is consistent with this meaning; in CONFIRMATION of which
observe Rom_1:25, Rom_1:26, where δικαιοσύνη αὐτοῦ evidently means God's own righteousness, as also
above, Rom_1:5. If this view is CORRECT , there is no need to follow commentators into their discussions
of the significance of χωρὶς νό:ου in supposed connection with the idea of man's imputed righteousness;
such as whether it is meant to declare justification through Christ to be without the aid of the Law—"sine
legis adminiculo" (Calvin)—or to exclude all legal works, done before, or even after justification, from any
share in the office of justification. However true these positions may be, what is said here seems simply to
mean that God's righteousness has been manifested in Christ in a different way, and on a different principle,
from that of law. The principle of law is to enjoin and forbid, and to require complete obedience; but law,
even as exhibited in the Divine Law of the Jews, has been shown to fail to ENABLE man thus to attain

to δικαιοσύνη ; therefore, apart from this exacting principle, the righteousness of God is now revealed to
man, embracing him in itself. The absence of the article before νό:ου here, and its insertion in the latter
clause of the same verse, where the Mosaic Law is definitely referred to, is fully explained by what has been
said above under Rom_2:13.Being witnessed, etc., is introduced parenthetically by way of intimating that
this manifestation of God's righteousness, though "apart from law," is not in any opposition to the teaching of
the Law and the prophets, being, in fact, anticipated by them. The proof of this appears afterwards
in Rom_4:1R25.
gktWsedvdoaeh 9v4 THE BELIEVER’S RIGHTEOUSNESS
Rom_3:21*22. But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the Law
and the Prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them
that believe.
IT is justly observed by our Lord, that “they that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.”
Persons never value a remedy till they are aware of their disease: they must know their condemnation and
misery by the Law, before they will receive with gratitude the glad tidings of the Gospel. On this ACCOUNT
St. Paul labours through the whole preceding part of this epistle, and especially in the ten verses before
the text, to prove all, both Jews and Gentiles, guilty before God; and to shew that they need a better
righteousness than any which they themselves can work out. Then he introduces that righteousness which
is exhibited in the Gospel, and is offered to every repenting and believing sinner.
To elucidate the subject before us, we propose to shew,
I. What is that righteousness whereby we are to be saved—
The Apostle’s description of it is as clear and comprehensive as we can possibly desire:
1. It is “the righteousness of God”—
[Twice
is it called “the righteousness of God;” by which expression we are to understand that it is a
righteousness provided by God for sinful man, wrought out by God himself in the midst of us, and accepted
of God on our behalf.
When we were destitute of any righteousness of our own, and incapable of establishing one that should be
sufficient for us, God, in his infinite mercy determined to provide one for us, that should be commensurate
with the demands of law and justice, and fully adequate to our wants. For this end he sent his co*equal, co*
eternal Son to fulfil the precepts of the law which we had broken, and to endure its penalties which we had
incurred. The Lord Jesus came into the world and executed his high commission;
and thus, as the Prophet
Daniel expresses it, “brought in an everlasting righteousness [Note: Dan_9:24.].” He being “Emmanuel, God
with us,” his righteousness is truly and properly the righteousness of God. This righteousness God accepts
for us
as though it were our own. In consideration of what Jesus suffered, he remits our punishment; and in

consideration of Christ’s meritorious obedience, he bestows on us the reward of eternal life. Hence, from
beginning to end, this is distinguished from the righteousness of man;
seeing that it was provided by God
the Father, wrought out by God the Son, and shall be accepted both by the Father and the Son on our
behalf.]
2. It is a righteousness “without the law”—
[By this expression the Apostle distinguishes it from any righteousness arising from our obedience to the
law; and intimates, that it is totally independent of any works of ours, past, present, or future. No works of
ours can add to it in the smallest degree, or render it either more satisfactory to God, or more sufficient for
us. On the contrary, if we were to attempt to unite any thing of our own with it, instead of rendering it more
firm, we should utterly make it void; and instead of securing to ourselves an interest in it, we should cut off
ourselves from all hope of acceptance by it [Note: Gal_5:2; Gal_5:4.]. We must not be understood to say,
that this righteousness supersedes the PRACTICE
of good works, (for it lays us under tenfold obligation
to perform them [Note: Tit_2:11*12.]) but that it excludes all reliance on
our own works, and will on
no ACCOUNT
admit a creature’s righteousness to participate the honour of justifying us before God.]
3. It is a righteousness “by faith of Jesus Christ”—
[As in the foregoing expressions this righteousness is declared to be God’s, exclusive of any works of man,
so here we are told how it becomes ours. But this part of the subject will be more fully considered under the
third head of our discourse; I will therefore only observe at present, that we must obtain an interest in this
righteousness, not by working, but by believing in Christ. We must no more attempt to PURCHASE it by
our works, than to add to it
by our works; or, if we will purchase it, we must “buy it without MONEY
and
without price
[Note: Isa_55:1.].”]
To CONFIRM
the Apostle’s description, we shall proceed to shew,
II. What evidence we have that this is the only justifying righteousness—
There will be no room left to doubt respecting it, if we consider, that,
1. It was “manifested” to be so by the Gospel—
[This truth had been obscurely intimated under the law; but “now
” it was fully “manifested” by the Gospel.
When Christ was just entering on his ministry, John Baptist pointed him out as “the Lamb of God that should
take away the sins of the world [Note: Joh_1:29.].” Christ himself declared that he was about to “give his life
a ransom for many [Note: Mat_20:28.],” and that they were to receive the remission of sins as purchased by
his blood [Note: Mat_26:28.]. St. Peter in his very first sermon exhorted the people to believe in Christ for the

remission of their sins, and declared to them that there was no other name whereby they could be saved
[Note: Act_2:38; Act_4:11*12.]. St. Paul in numberless places insists upon our seeking justification solely by
faith in Christ, without the smallest mixture of dependence on our own works [Note: Rom_4:3*
5; Rom_4:14; Rom_5:9; Rom_5:15*18.]: and when St. Peter, through fear of the Jews, had given some
reason to think that an obedience to the Mosaic ritual ought to be, or at least might
be, added to the
righteousness of Christ in order to render it more effectual, St. Paul reproved him publicly before all the
Church, and reminded him that all, not excepting the Apostles themselves, must be justified solely by the
righteousness of Christ, without any works of the law [Note:Gal_2:14*16.]. Is not this a
strong CONFIRMATION
of the point before us?]
2. It was “witnessed by the law and the prophets”—
[The moral law may in some sense be considered as bearing testimony to the righteousness of Christ: for
though it makes no express mention of it, yet, by condemning all without exception, it “shuts men up to the
faith of Christ,” and serves as “a schoolmaster to bring them to Christ [Note: Gal_3:22*24.].” The ceremonial
law in all its ordinances pointed directly to Christ. It is not possible to contemplate the Paschal lamb, or the
scape*goat, or indeed any of the sacrifices or ablutions, without seeing Christ prefigured by them, and
confessing him
to be “the end of the law for righteousness” to believing sinners [Note: Rom_10:4.].
If we consult the prophets, they are unanimous in directing us to Christ. The prophecies that preceded
Moses, represent Christ as the one conqueror of the serpent [Note: Gen_3:15.], and the one source of
blessedness to man [Note: Gen_12:3; Gen_15:6.]. Moses himself spake of him
as the prophet, to whom all
must look for instruction and salvation [Note: Act_3:22*23.]. Jeremiah calls him by name, “The Lord our
righteousness [Note: Jer_23:6.]:” and Isaiah represents every child of God as saying with exultation, “In the
Lord have I righteousness and strength [Note: Isa_45:24*25.].” To adduce more proofs is unnecessary, since
we are assured by St. Peter, that all
the prophets unite their testimonies to the same effect
[Note: Act_3:24; Act_10:43.]. What stronger evidence than this can any man desire?]
But we have further to inquire,
III. How this righteousness becomes ours—
Faith is the means whereby alone we obtain an interest in it—
[This also is twice
intimated in the text: nor can it be too often repeated, or too strongly insisted on. We must
come to Christ as perishing sinners; and, without attempting to establish, in whole or in part, our own
righteousness, we must submit to be saved by his alone [Note: Rom_10:3.]. We must be contented to
have his
“righteousness imputed to us without works [Note:Rom_4:6.],” and to make his obedience the one
ground of our hope [Note: Rom_5:19.]. They alone who thus
regard Christ, can properly be said to believe in

him; and it is only when we thusbelieve, that “he is made of God righteousness unto us [Note: 1Co_1:30.].”]
On our believing, it is instantly put to our ACCOUNT—
[This righteousness is bestowed upon us freely by God himself; it is not only given “unto” us as a portion, but
is put “upon” us as a garment. In this light it is spoken of by our Lord himself, who counsels us to “buy it of
him that we may be clothed, and that the shame of our nakedness may not appear [Note: Rev_3:18.].”
Without this, we are despoiled of our innocence, and exposed to shame, as our first parents were upon the
introduction of sin: but as they were covered by the skins of their sacrifices ACCORDING to the direction
which God himself had given them [Note: Gen_3:7; Gen_3:21.], so are we by “putting on the Lord Jesus
[Note: Rom_13:14.]:” nor, when clothed with his righteousness, can even God himself behold a spot or
blemish in us [Note: Eph_5:27.]. Hence the Church rejoices with joy unspeakable [Note: Isa_61:10.], and is
rendered meet for the presence of her heavenly bridegroom [Note: Rev_19:8.].]
Application—
Must not the selfRrighteous moralist
then stand confounded before God?
[Surely it is no light matter to pour contempt on the righteousness of God, as though it were insufficient for
us without “the filthy rags of our righteousness [Note: Isa_64:6.].” It is no light matter to reject the united
testimony of the law and the prophets, of Christ and his Apostles. And as the guilt of such conduct is great,
so is also the danger: and whosoever persists in it must irremediably perish [Note: Rom_9:30*32.].]
On the other hand, should not the selfRcondemning sinner
receive encouragement from this subject?
[It is well to condemn ourselves, but not to despond. Twice
is it declared in the text, that this righteousness is
for “all
” who will believe in Christ [Note: Compare Act_13:38*39. with Isa_1:18and Rom_5:20*21.]. And is it
not sufficient for all?
Let all then “set to their seal that God is true.” Let them honour the righteousness of
Christ by their affiance in it; and it shall be “manifested” to their consciences, no less than in the Scriptures
themselves, that it is complete in itself, adequate to our necessities, and effectual for all who rely upon it.]
ifncat Isαf;,sgCgS,spdsp:jswg:FOsg;CwsEpj.C.GsCwsgvken from the opening words of Verse 21 of Chapter 3:
"But now..." You can almost hear the sigh of relief in those two words. After God's appraisal of man's efforts
to achieve some standing before him, given to us in the verses previous to this, now come God's words of
relief, God's total answer to man's total failure.
Paul has concluded his description of what humanity is like as God sees it, with his ability to see everything
vνp:gs:wTs pg;C.GsCws;CFF,.sdjpEs;Cws,O,wIs.pgsp:jsthoughts, our hearts, our intents, or our motives. We saw
last week that there is clearly no one who can make it in God's sight. These words from Verses 10.12 tell us
that:

There is no one righteous, not even one;
there is no one who understands,
no one who searches for God.
All have turned away
and together become worthless.
There is no one who does good,
not even one. {Rom 3:10.12 IV}
That is God's appraisal. "But now," Paul says...
But now a righteousness from God, apart from the law, has been made known, to which the Law and the
Prophets testify. {Rom 3:21 IV}
This is God's great "nevertheless" in the face of man's failure. In the subsequent paragraphs, the Apostle
Paul develops this in his usual reasoned and logical style. For a little guide to this section, here is the way it
breaks down:
In Verse 21 you have God's answer to man's failure. In Verses 22.24 he tells us how that gift of righteousness
is obtained. Verses 25.26 tell us how and why it works; and In Verses 27.31, the results that follow are given.
Let us look together now at this great statement beginning with Verse 21, one of the great declarations of the
gospel:
But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the
Prophets testify. {Rom 3:21 IV}
This is what Paul elsewhere calls "the glorious gospel of the blessed God" {1 Tim 1:11}, the good news that
God has to announce to us, which consists of a gift that God gives us .. the righteousness of God himself. We
have already seen that this word righteousness is highly misunderstood in our day. Often it is associated with
behavior. If people are behaving in a right way, we say that they are behaving righteously. But in the book of
Romans righteousness does not directly touch on behavior. It is not what you do; it is what you are! That is
even more important, because your behavior stems from what you are. The gift Paul is talking about, the gift
from God, is that of a righteous standing.
But the real meaning underlying this word, as understood by us today, is found in the word worth. People
everywhere are looking for a sense of worth. In fact, psychologists tell us that this sense of worth is the most
essential element in human activity, and that without it you cannot function as a human being. Therefore,
whether we know it or not, or describe it in these terms, we are all looking for a sense of worth. But the gospel
announces that it is given to us. What other people work all their lives to achieve is handed to us right at the
beginning, when we believe in Jesus Christ. According to the gospel, we cannot earn it, but it is given to us.
ow that is the good news, and what a wonderful statement that is.
The other day, in reading an article on some of the movements of our day, I came across these words by Dr.
Lewis Smede, a professor at Fuller Theological Seminary. This is what he said.
Anyone who can see the needs of people today must recognize that the malaise of our time is an epidemic of
self.doubt and self.depreciation. Those whose job it is to heal people's spiritual problems know that the
overwhelming majority of people who seek help, are people who are sick from abhorring themselves. A
prevailing sense of being without worth is the pervasive sickness of our age.
That comes from a man who spends a great deal of time trying to help people with emotional problems and
personality difficulties in their lives. He says the basic need is a sense of worth. There are millions of people
today who are openly acknowledging that they need help, and who come looking for help. There are others
who never ask, but behind their smiling facades and confident airs, there are insecure hearts and a
consciousness of deep self.doubt. This is the basic problem of mankind.
This gospel, therefore, is dealing with something tremendously significant. It does not have to do only with

what happens when you die. I think this is one of the reasons why hundreds of churches today are half.empty;
so many people do not know that self.worth is what the gospel is all about. Young people today are looking for
a ground of worth. They want to be loved.
We just read this prayer request of a boy who desperately needs to know that his dad loves him, and I sensed
a murmur of concern throughout the congregation as we identified with that feeling of needing to be loved.
Well, far, far deeper than the need to feel that some human being loves us is our need to know that God loves
us, and that we are acceptable in his sight, that we have standing and value and worth to him. Something
about us, that bit of eternity planted in our hearts by God himself, bears witness to us that this is the ultimate
issue. Somehow life can never be satisfying if that question is not settled. Therefore this good news comes with
tremendous relevance today.
What God is offering is a gift of righteousness .. his own perfect righteousness, that cannot be improved
upon, a perfect value. By faith in Jesus Christ, he gives us a sense of worth and acceptance, and there could be
no better news to mankind.
Paul adds two things to this, so as to make it clear to us: First, this righteousness is apart from the Law. That
is to say, it is not something that you earn; it is a gift. You cannot earn it by doing your best to be pleasing to
God, and anybody who approaches God on those terms has already failed. There is no way anyone can
measure up to God's standards. The sweetest, dearest little old lady that you know of cannot make it, because
God knows her heart. evertheless, God has found a way to give us that gift, and therefore it is apart from
the Law; it is not something we can earn.
Second, Paul says, it is witnessed by the Law and the Prophets. This is not something entirely new in history,
something that only Jesus Christ brought to light. He did make it known, so that we understand it far more
clearly because of his coming, but it is found in the Old Testament as well as in the ew. The saints who lived
before the cross knew and experienced the wonder of this gift just as much as we do today, although they
came to it by a different process.
The Law bore testimony to this righteous gift of God providing a series of sacrifices. The Jews knew,
somehow, that they did not measure up to God's standards, so the Law itself provided a system of offerings
and sacrifices that could be brought and offered on the altar. This system pictured the death of Jesus; the
whole sacrificial system of the Old Testament is a witness to mankind that One is coming who will be "the
Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world," {John 1:29b}. They bear witness to this righteous gift.
The Prophets also .. these well.known names of the Old Testament: Abraham, Moses, David, Isaiah,
Jeremiah, and others .. not only talked about this gift, but experienced it themselves. In one of the Psalms
that we will read in the next chapter, David is quoted as saying, "Blessed is the man whose transgression is
forgiven, to whom the Lord will not impute iniquity, whose sins are covered," {cf, Psa 32:1}. David
understood that God had found a way to give the gift of worth to a man, even before the cross occurred in
history. This is not new, Paul says; nevertheless, it is clearly explained and made fully available to us in the
cross of Jesus.
In the next division Paul tells us how to obtain this gift. Perhaps you are looking for this sense of worth, this
sense of value, of being loved and wanted by God. How do you get it? Here is Paul's answer:
This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference,
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the
redemption that came by Christ Jesus. {Rom 3:22.24 IV}
There is one way .. expressed here in four different aspects, but only one way .. through faith in Jesus Christ:
otice first how Paul's answer centers immediately on the person of the Savior, not only on his work or his
teaching, but on his person. It is by faith in Christ himself that you come into this standing. He is the Savior;
it is not what he taught, not even what he gives; but it is he who saves us. Therefore the gift involves a
relationship to a living person.

That is why in John's gospel he does not say, "Believe in what Jesus did" but rather, "As many as received
him, to them he gave power to become the sons of God," {cf, John 1:12}. That means there must come a time
when you open your life to Christ, when you ask him to be what he offers to be .. your Lord. Later in this
epistle Paul will say, "If you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord,' and believe in your heart that God
raised him from the dead, you will be saved [another term of this gift of righteousness]. For it is with your
heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved," {Rom
10:9.10 IV}. Jesus himself said, in the book of Revelation, "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone
hears my voice and opens the door [the door of your will, of your heart] I will come in to him and eat with
him, and he with me," {cf, Rev 3:20}. There is no other way. o way can be found in all the religions of earth
that can bring men into a sense of value and standing in God's sight, and of worth and love before him, except
this way by faith in Jesus Christ. Second, Paul stresses the fact here that it is all who believe who are saved; it
is not automatically and universally applied. People are teaching today that the death of Christ was so
effective that whether people hear about it or not, they are already saved; they do not even need to know
about it, for they are saved by the death of Jesus. But Paul is careful to make clear that this is not true. You
are saved when you personally believe. Faith, therefore, is the hand that takes this gift that God offers. What
good is a gift if you do not take it? Gifts can be offered, but they cannot be used until they are taken. When
that occurs, then the gift becomes effective in the life of the one who takes it.
The third element that describes how we obtain this gift is in the phrase, "justified freely by his grace." Do
you see what that says? It is God who does this. If you try to say, therefore, that there is anything man must
do to be justified, you will destroy the gift, because it is all of God. We are justified, declared righteous,
declared of worth in God's sight, by his grace. If you add baptism to that, or church membership, or anything
else, then you destroy the grace of God. It is freely and completely and wholly God who saves us. We do not
contribute a thing.
Have you ever sung the hymn, "othing in my hand I bring; simply to Thy cross I cling"? That is one
beautiful way of expressing this truth. The last word in this section is this: It is "through the redemption that
came by Christ Jesus." That is, Christ is the one who accomplished something that does the work of
redemption. Here we are brought face.to.face with the cross, with the death of Jesus, and the apostle is
underlining this fact. Many churches are given over to following the teachings of Jesus, but hardly ever refer
to his cross. If you find a so.called Christianity that does not emphasize the cross, you are listening to
"another gospel" which is not the true gospel. The real gospel is based only upon the redemption which Jesus
accomplished in his cross.
Paul now gives a brief explanation of how and why this redemption works. "How" is found in the opening
words of Verse 25, and "why" in the verses that follow:
God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his
justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished .. he did it to
demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies the man who has faith in
Jesus. {Rom 3:25.26 IV}
I want you to give very careful attention to these words. This is the heart of the gospel, and the ground of
assurance. Many people, even though they become Christians, struggle with assurance. They do not rest upon
the fact that these words are true, so they are filled, often, with a struggle of doubts and uncertainty. They
have a sneaking suspicion, deep inside, that perhaps, despite all these wonderful words, God is still not quite
satisfied; if something should happen to them, they might be lost. I want you to pay very careful attention to
Paul's argument here, because this is the answer to that struggle.
First, he says that God has accomplished a propitiatory sacrifice: God presented Jesus as a "sacrifice of
atonement" (that is the phrase here) through faith in his blood. His words, "sacrifice of atonement" are really
translating a single word in Greek (hilasterion, for you Greek students), which is translated "expiation" in
some versions, and "propitiation" in others. I know that those words are theological terms, and may not
make much sense to you. But I want you to understand their meaning, because this is the heart of the gospel:
Expiation is that which satisfies justice; Propitiation is that which awakens love.

Both of these terms are involved in the death of Jesus, but expiation does not go quite as far as propitiation.
Propitiation carries us clear through to the awakening of God's love toward us. That is why I think
"propitiatory sacrifice" is a better translation than the word "expiation."
Let me illustrate the difference: In these days, we often read of industrial accidents. Let us say that someone
has been injured in the course of his work, and has been partially paralyzed. The company is at fault, having
neglected to provide safety equipment, thus creating the conditions that put this man in danger. So the
company is held accountable for the man's injury and subsequent paralysis. Therefore the court awards this
man a tremendous sum of money, to be paid by the company. When the money is paid, the company has
expiated its wrongdoings; it has satisfied the demands of justice. It no longer has any responsibility toward
this man; it has paid its costly debt. That is what expiation means. But that does, not say anything about how
the man feels toward the company. He may yet be filled with resentment, bitterness, even hatred. He may
spend the rest of his life abhorring the name of that company, even though it has given him all the money he
could possibly use. The debt has been expiated, but it has not been propitiated.
What Paul is saying here is that human sin has injured God, just as that man was injured by the negligence of
the company. Our sin has hurt and injured God, and justice demands that we be punished for that sin in some
way. In the death of Jesus that punishment was accomplished, so that God's justice was satisfied. If you read
this as expiation, that is all the cross means. In a way, it means that it paid God off, so that he no longer holds
us to blame. But that is not all that Paul is saying here. The word means also that God's love has been
awakened toward us, and he reaches out to love us, and grants us the feeling of worth and acceptance and
value in his sight. That is what propitiation means, that is what the death of Jesus does. It did satisfy God's
justice, but it went further; it awakened his love, and now he is ready to pour out love upon us.
Paul shows us why this had to happen, beginning in the middle of Verse 25,
He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand
unpunished .. {Rom 3:25b IV}
What is he talking about? He is referring to all the centuries when God apparently had done nothing about
the wrongdoings of men. We find people questioning this yet today. They say, "Where is the God of justice?
How is it that a just God lets these tyrants rise up and murder millions of people? How can he let people live
in poverty and squalor and filth? He never seems to do anything about oppressors! Where is the justice of
God?" Those questions have been raised for centuries; in fact, we even find them in the Psalms.
We have to face the fact that the last time in history that mankind got a clear idea of God's holy justice was
the time of the Flood. In response to the wickedness of men toward other men, God wiped out the whole
human race, except for eight people. The Flood was a testimony to God's sense of justice, but there has never
been a manifestation of it to that degree since that time. So the question arises in human hearts, "Doesn't God
really care? It doesn't matter whether you do wrong or not, God will let you get away with it. God won't do
anything to you." David writes, "Why do the wicked flourish, and the righteous suffer? Where is the God of
justice?" ow, God has been patiently restraining his hand, in order that the human race may continue to
exist, but people do not see that. Therefore the justice of God seems to be compromised by his self.restraint.
But the cross settles that. The cross says that God remains just. All the stored.up punishment amply deserved
by the human race, is now poured out without restraint upon the head of Jesus on the cross. God did not
spare his Son one iota of the wrath that man deserves. Just because Jesus was his beloved Son, he did not
lessen the punishment a single degree. All of it was poured out on him. That explains the cry of abandonment
that comes from the cross, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" {Matt 27:46, Mark 15:34 KJV}.
In the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus faced the possibility of being shut away from all love, all beauty, all
truth, all warmth, all acceptance, the possibility of being forever denied all that makes life beautiful. There he
faced the eternity of emptiness in the judgment of God, and this is what he experienced on the cross; all of it
was poured out on him.
Paul's argument is that he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time .. so as to be just, and yet be
free to extend love to us who deserve only his justice. That is the glory of the good news of the gospel. God' s

love has been freed to act toward us, and his justice satisfied, so that it is no longer compromised by the fact
that he forgives sinners. In the closing paragraph, Paul gives us the results of this forgiveness.
Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? o, but on that
of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. Is God the God of Jews
only? Is he not the God of Gentiles, too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the
circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through the same faith. Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith?
ot at all! Rather, we uphold the law. {Rom 3:27.31 IV}
Paul raises and answers three simple questions to show us the natural results of this tremendous acceptance
that God gives us in Jesus Christ:
First, who can boast? o one, absolutely no one. How can you boast when everyone receives the gift of grace
without any merit on his part? This means that any ground for self.righteousness is done away with, and this
is why the ugliest sin among Christians is self.righteousness. When we begin to look down on people who are
involved in homosexuality, or outright wickedness, or greed, or gambling, or whatever .. when we begin to
think that we are better than they are .. then we have denied what God has done for us. All boasting is
excluded. There are no grounds for anybody to say, "Well, at least I didn't do this, or this, or this." The only
ground of acceptance is the gift of grace. Then, no one is excluded from grace, Jew or Gentile. o special
privilege or favor counts in God's sight. He has no most.favored.nation; they are all alike before him. Paul
argues, "Is God the God of Jews only? Then there must be two Gods .. one for the Jews and one for the
Gentiles. But that cannot be; there is only one God; God is one." Therefore he is equally the God of the
Gentiles and the God of the Jews, because both must come on exactly the same ground. This is the wonderful
thing about the gospel. All mankind is leveled; no one can stand on any other basis than the work of Jesus
Christ on our behalf. Paul's third question is, "Does this cancel out the Law or set it aside? Do we no longer
need the Law?" His answer is, "o, it fulfills the Law." The righteousness which the Law demands is the very
righteousness that is given to us in Christ. So if we have it as a gift, we no longer need to fear the Law, because
the demands of the Law are met. But it is not something we can take any credit for; indeed, whenever we act
in unrighteousness after this, the Law comes in again to do its work of showing us what is wrong. That is all
the Law is good for. It shows us what is wrong, and immediately, all the hurt and injury accomplished by our
sin is relieved again by the grace of God, the forgiveness of God.
Receiving God's forgiveness is not something we do only once; it is something we do again and again. It is the
basis on which we live, constantly taking fresh forgiveness from the hand of God. John's letter puts it this
way:
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness. {1 Jn 1:9 KJV}
That is God's gift, and we need all the time to take it afresh from the hand of God. When we find ourselves
slipping into self.righteousness, when we find ourselves looking down our noses, when we find ourselves filled
with pride and acting in arrogance, being critical and calloused and caustic and sarcastic toward one another,
or feeling bitter and resentful .. and all these things are yet possible to us .. our relationship to a holy God is
not affected, if we acknowledge that we sinned. We can come back, and God's love is still there. He still
accepts us and highly values us. We are his dearly loved children, and he will never change.
That is what God's gift of righteousness means to us. It is wonderful good news indeed, that we never need
fear. The God of ultimate holiness, the God who lives in holy light, whom we cannot begin to approach, has
accepted us in the Beloved, and we stand on the same ground of worth that he himself has. We can remind
ourselves, as I seek to do every day, of three things:
I am made in God's image .. therefore I am able to act beyond the capacity of any animal on earth. I am not
an animal; I am a man made in God's image. Second, I am possessed of God's Spirit .. that means I am
forgiven, I am freed, and I am filled. Third, I am part of God's plan .. I am part of the working out of his
purposes in the world today, and God will make everything I do fit into his plan.
Therefore I can go on with purpose, and with confidence, and with love; without guilt, nor any sense of
inadequacy or fear. I have perfect freedom to concern myself with the problems around me, and not be all

wrapped up with the ones inside. Those are all taken care of, and that is truly wonderful.
BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR, “
The righteousness of God is
I. Prepared by God. Devised; approved; conferred by Him.
II. Attested by the law and the prophets.
III. Secured by Christ. Free grace; redemption; propitiation.
IV. Designed for all. All need it; all are creatures of God.
V. Received by faith. Without merit; without works.
VI. Does not make void, but establish the law. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
The righteousness of God
The apostle shows—
I. That it is a divine righteousness, not a human. That righteousness which we had lost in Adam
was but a human thing, finite like him who lost it; but that which we gain is Divine and forms an
infinite compensation. It is called the righteousness of God, because it is—
1. Provided by Him.
2. Founded on the doings and sufferings of the Son of God.
3. Provides such a compensation for human unrighteousness, that it not only takes it all
away, but brings in a new and far higher and surer footing for the sinner to rest on.
II. That it is a righteousness without the law. Not an unlawful righteousness—one not based on
law, or one in providing which law has been set aside, but one which, in so far as we are
concerned, has nothing to do with law at all. It is not a righteousness which asks any doing or
obeying on our part to complete it, for then it would cease to be “the righteousness of God,” and
would become “the righteousness of man.” In so far as God and Christ are concerned, it has
everything to do with law, but in so far as we are concerned it has nothing to do with it.
III. That it has been “manifested.” It is not a thing hidden from view. God has been at infinite
pains to bring it forward both on our account and on His.
IV. That it is a righteousness witnessed by the law and the prophets. It is not something now
come to light for the first time; it is something which has been proclaimed from the beginning.
To this the eye of every saint, from Abel downward, has been directed—on this the feet of every
saint have stood, this every type and prophecy and sacrifice has set forth.
V. That it is a righteousness which is by the faith of Jesus Christ. It is not our faith that is our
righteousness. If it were so, then faith would be a work, and then should we be justified by our
own acts. It is by believing that we are identified with Christ, so that His doing becomes ours;
His suffering ours; His fulfilling of the law and obedience ours.
VI. That it is a righteousness for the unrighteous. “For there is no difference: for all have sinned
and come short of the glory of God.” It is our unrighteousness that fits us for this. How foolish,
then, to say, “I am too great a sinner to be forgiven.” It is like the sun. It is one sun, yet it is
enough for and free to everyone. (H. Bonar, D. D.)

The righteousness of God
In various places this phrase signifies either that holiness and rectitude of character which is the
attribute of God, or that distributive justice by which He maintains the authority of His law; but
where it refers to man’s salvation it signifies, as in Rom_3:21, that fulfilment of the law or
perfect conformity to it in all its demands, which, consistently with His justice, God has
appointed and provided for the salvation of sinners. This implies that the infinite justice of His
character requires what is provided, and also that it is approved and accepted; for if it be God’s
righteousness it must be required and accepted by the justice of God. The righteousness of God,
which is received by faith, denotes something that becomes the property of the believer. It
cannot, then, be here the Divine attribute of justice, but the Divine work which God has wrought
through His Son. This is, indeed, the righteousness of God, for it has been provided by God, and
from first to last has been effected by His Son Jesus Christ, who is the mighty God and the
Father of eternity. To that righteousness is the eye of the believer ever to be directed; on that
righteousness must he rest; on that righteousness must he live; on that righteousness must he
die; in that righteousness must he appear before the judgment seat; in that righteousness must
he stand forever in the presence of a righteous God (Isa_61:10). This righteousness differs
essentially from all other righteousness—
I. In its author, for it is the righteousness not of creatures, but of the Creator (Isa_45:8).
1. It is the righteousness of God in the sense in which the world is the work of God. The
Father created it by the Son in the same way as by the Son He created the world; and if the
Father effected this righteousness because His Son effected it, then His Son must be one
with Himself (2Pe_1:1).
2. It was during His incarnation that the Son of God wrought out this righteousness. Before
He acted as the Creator and Sovereign of the world—but afterwards as a servant. Before that
period He was perfectly holy, but that holiness could not be called obedience, for it was
exercised in making the law, and by it governing the world. But in His latter condition He
became subject to the law, and in our nature conferred more honour on the law than the
obedience of all intelligent creatures, and more honour than it had received of dishonour
from all its transgressors (Isa_42:21).
3. The obedience of Jesus Christ magnified the law because it was rendered by Divine
appointment (Zec_2:10-11). It is impossible therefore to entertain too exalted an idea of the
regard which God has for the character of His holy law.
II. In its nature this righteousness is two fold, fulfilling both the precept and its penalty. This, by
any creature the most exalted, is impossible. The fulfilment of the precepts is all that could be
required of creatures in their sinless condition. But the state of the Second Man was essentially
different. Christ was made under the law, but it was a broken law; and, consequently, He was
made under its curse (Gal_3:13). Justice, therefore, required that He should fulfil also the
penalty. A mere creature may obey the precept of the law, or suffer the penalty it denounces, but
he cannot do both. But Jesus was capable at the same moment of suffering at the hand of God,
and of obeying the precept to love God. This was made manifest during the whole period of His
incarnation as well as at His death. By the sufferings of Christ the execution of the law was
complete; while no punishment which creatures could suffer can be thus designated. It is He
only who could put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. By enduring the threatened punishment
He fully satisfied justice. In token of having received a full discharge He came forth from the
grave; and when He shall appear the second time it shall be without sin—the sin which He had
taken upon Him and all its effects being forever done away. But if nothing beyond the suffering
of the penalty had taken place men would only have been released from the punishment due to
sin: It they were to obtain the reward of obedience its precepts must also be obeyed; and this

was accomplished to the utmost by Jesus Christ.
III. In its extent. Every creature is bound for himself to all that obedience to his Creator of
which he is capable. He is under the obligation to love God with all his heart, etc., and beyond
this he cannot advance. It is evident, therefore, that he can have no superabounding
righteousness to be placed in the way of merit to the account of another. And, besides this, if he
has sinned, he is bound to suffer for himself the whole penalty. But the obedience of Jesus
Christ, who is Himself infinite, as well as the punishment He suffered, being in themselves of
infinite value, are capable of being transferred in their effects without any diminution in their
respective values.
IV. In its duration. The righteousness of Adam or of angels could only be available while it
continued to be performed. The moment, therefore, in which they transgressed, the advantages
derived from all their previous obedience ceased. But the righteousness of God, brought in by
His Son, is an “everlasting righteousness” (Dan_9:24). It was performed within a limited period
of time, but in its effects it can never terminate (Isa_51:6; Isa 51:8; Psa_119:142; Heb_10:14;
Heb 9:12).
V. In its influence. It is the sole ground of reconciliation of sinners with God, and of their
justification, and also of their intercession (1Jn_2:1). It is the price paid for those new heavens
and that new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness. Man was made lower than the angels, but
this righteousness exalts him above them. The redeemed people of God stand nearest to the
throne, while the angels stand “round about” them. They enter heaven clothed with a
righteousness infinitely better than that which angels possess, or in which Adam was created. (J.
Haldane.)
God’s righteousness man’s fear and man’s hope
A poor man who had spent a life of ignorance and sin was found by a London clergyman
apparently dying in a miserable garret. He was in great anxiety of mind from an apparently
accidental cause. A stray leaf torn from a Testament met his eye. It was part of this chapter. He
had read the vivid description of a sinner and had applied it to his own ease. But where was the
remedy? where the gospel? Alas! the paper ended, “But now the righteousness of God without
the law is”… “Is what?” said the anxious man. “Do the next words give any hope for such a sinner
as I am?” The remainder of the chapter was read and explained to him, and the good news was
as cold water to his thirsty soul. (W. Baxendale.)
God’s method of righteousness
There is not a more interesting episode in English history than the story of the siege of Calais by
Edward III. The king had beleaguered the town for a year, when the garrison surrendered, and
the incensed monarch demanded that six of the principal citizens should be sent to him with the
keys of the town, having halters about their necks. Six brave men volunteered to go on this cruel
embassy, and were instantly ordered to execution. Queen Philippa, however, strenuously
interceded for them, obtained their release, entertained them, and dismissed them in safety.
Now compare this much vaunted instance of human clemency with that of God and then you
will confess how unlike His ways are to our ways, and His thoughts to our thoughts. Those
burgesses deserved not to suffer, and the king only granted them their lives in sullen submission
to the importunity of his queen. And she did not make them her friends, but only dismissed
them in a manner honourable to herself. With how much greater love has our offended God
dealt with us! We appeared before Him as culprits condemned, and if He had ordered our

instant execution we could not have impugned His justice. Not waiting to be moved, He was the
first to ask us to be reconciled; and then forgiving us our sins He receives us as children. Note—
I. The relation which subsists between God and man.
1. God is a great King; and we all are His natural subjects. This is quite independent of our
choice or suffrages. A person born in England finds himself hedged about with laws which
were neither of his devising nor of his adopting, yet to which he is bound under penalty to
conform. By a like anterior necessity he is born under a system of physical laws. From that
which is human and political we can escape; but from that which is Divine and natural there
is no escape. Now just as you are of necessity born into the midst of these two systems of
laws, so are you also born under subjection to a third, possessing a higher and more awful
character. You are amenable to God’s moral laws, which are more searching in their
application, more stringent in their requisitions, more tremendous in their sanctions, more
enduring in their operation than the other two. You may get away from the coils of national
law by journeying to another country; and you will be released from physical laws when
death shall transfer you to another world; but you will not even then escape from the control
of God’s moral law.
2. The whole world is proven guilty in God’s sight.
(1) We resorts His authority and feel submission a hardship, simply because we are
conscious rebels before Him. Ours are the feelings of culprits who hate the laws which
they have broken, and the breach of which has brought them into trouble. This is true of
all mankind, without limitation or exception. This is the truth which St. Paul
demonstrates in chaps, 1 and 2.
(2) But another mode of reasoning is adopted in chap. 5. There Paul boldly announces,
as a fundamental principle of God’s dealings with mankind, the organic unity of our race.
Therefore, if any part be naturally foul and vile, all is so too; if one be guilty before God,
all must be the same. We are a sinful race as inheriting the sin of Adam.
II. Such being the case, let us ask, “How can a man be just with God?” The answer constitutes
the very marrow and pith of the gospel. And what we learn is—
1. That God can save us from our sins and recover us to His favour.
2. That He can do this by freely and generously forgiving us all our sins, and absolutely
remitting their penalty.
3. That this forgiveness of man’s sins is not a wanton and arbitrary act of the Divine
clemency which might outrage His own holiness and dishonour His law.
4. Nor is it the reward, merited or unmerited, of works of righteousness and legal obedience,
which we can render in the future as a counterbalance and set-off against our transgressions
in the past.
5. But it is rendered possible by the sacrificial sufferings and death of His Son our Saviour
Jesus Christ, who gave Himself as a ransom for our souls.
6. That this benefit accrues to us simply and solely on the condition of faith or trust in the
blood of Christ, assuming only that we have a true knowledge of sin which leads us heartily
to repent of it, and to seek deliverance from the curse of a broken law.
7. That thin is a mode of making us righteous in God’s sight in complete harmony with His
own perfect righteousness of character and law.
8. That this method of justification appertains alike to all mankind, for as there is no
essential difference in their sinfulness, so there is none in the way of their recovery to

holiness and life.
9. That this plan of mercy leaves no ground of boasting to man, but ensures all the glory to
God.
10. That it is the same which has existed from the beginning, being spoken of, however
dimly, by both Moses and the prophets. The inference is plain that none need despair; that
all may he saved; that the blame of any man’s being lost, to whom the word of this salvation
is sent, must rest with himself and not with God; and that it is the duty of those who are
entrusted with the ministry of reconciliation to proclaim a free and full and present salvation
to everyone that believeth. (T. G. Horton.)
How to attain righteousness
This passage contains the pith and kernel of the whole Epistle. All that precedes just clears the
ground for it. All that follows is related to it as explanation, illustration, confirmation, or
application.
I. Righteousness is the great end of the gospel. This is taken for granted throughout the Epistle.
1. With inspired insight Paul surveyed the condition of mankind, and put his finger at once
on its great root evil. This was not poverty, pain, death, but moral corruption. He saw that
that was the greatest gospel which could lift men out of the mire of wickedness and set their
feet on the rock of righteousness.
2. Their righteousness is real righteousness—not the covering of the leper with a fair robe,
but the curing of the leprosy. The righteousness of the gospel is indwelling goodness out of
which all virtues flow. Nothing short of this will satisfy—
(1) The requirements of God. He will not endure sham goodness. The God of truth,
hating all lies, cannot see a man to be righteous who is not righteous.
(2) The ends of redemption. That would be a most immoral gospel which promised
remission of the penalty leaving the disposition of wickedness uncorrected. The true
purpose of the gospel is (Tit_2:14).
(3) The needs of our own souls. Ever since the war between the seed of the woman and
the seed of the serpent began, mankind has felt that sin was misery, and righteousness
blessedness. The hunger and thirst for righteousness may be stifled with morbid cravings
for evil things. But in our better moments it wakes up, and then we feel that it is not
enough for the skin to be safe if the heart is diseased. We do not want merely not to be
hurt. We want “to be good.”
3. Paul sometimes uses “righteousness” in the “forensic” sense, i.e., to treat as righteous
rather than to make righteous (Rom_4:1-3; Rom 5:1). But he knew that “to justify” meant
both to make righteous and to forgive; and so he passes from one to the other with little
apparent discrimination, because he sees that they are only two faces of the same fact. On
the one hand, the act of forgiveness is the most powerful inducement to a change of
character. They who are forgiven most love most. Thus justification produces righteousness.
On the other hand, since God is aware of this influence of forgiveness He must confer the
pardon with a reference to it. He must see that in forgiving the sinner He is taking the best
step towards destroying the sin.
II. Righteousness is a gift of God. St. Paul has demonstrated the impossibility of man’s
acquiring righteousness by himself. Night cannot produce day. Water will not rise above its

level. Marah will never sweeten itself. We cannot grow righteous by natural development, since
you can only evolve what has been previously involved, and we have all lost the goodness of
original innocence. History has proved that the best of laws could not secure this end. Law is
good for detecting wickedness. It is the standard by which we are measured, but it has no power
for lifting us up to that standard. Now we can see the value of the great promise of the new
dispensation, of a righteousness of God—made by God, given by God. This is the essential idea
of the religion of grace. Therefore the great requisite is to be in such relations with God that we
may receive the gift. If we are far from or at enmity with Him, we are shut out from it. We
therefore need to be reconciled to God. Consequently—
III. Righteousness is received through faith in Christ. This faith is not the mere belief in a
doctrine, but active trust in Christ, practical reliance on His grace, obedient loyalty to His will
(Joh_15:10).
1. By faith in Christ as the sacrifice for sin we are reconciled with God. Christ having offered
Himself to God on our behalf we are called to look to Him as “the Way” to the Father. If
through pride or unbelief we think that we can dispense with a Saviour, we must not be
surprised if God rejects our overtures towards reconciliation (Act_13:38-39). The offering of
Christ not only secures forgiveness, but through this cleanses our conscience from dead
works to serve the living God (Heb_9:14).
2. By faith in Christ as the revelation of God we grow into the Divine image. Christ is the
pattern man because He is the Son of God. To be righteous is to be like God, like Christ.
When we trust to Him faithfully, we shall walk in His footsteps in the irresistible desire to be
near Him, and thus we shall unconsciously grow up into the likeness of Him and share His
righteousness.
3. By faith in Christ as our Lord and Master we are led into obedient loyalty to His will. He
who trusts Christ must trust Him in all His relations. Thus the faith which is reliance on a
Saviour becomes loyalty when it turns to a King. Then the righteousness which refused to
come at the cold, stern bidding of law springs forth as a very passion of devotion. (W. J.
Adeney, M. A.)
The announcement of righteousness by faith
I. That none can be justified in the sight of the Lawgiver by the law is evident; for—
1. No man has done the deeds of the law.
2. The law, when brought into contact with the deeds of men, always discovers sin and
pronounces condemnation.
3. The law is law only; a rule of life merely, and in no sense or manner a means of
restoration to a blameless state.
II. The righteousness or freedom from condemnation which the gospel dispensation reveals, is a
righteousness which—
1. God designs; the plan is of His devising.
2. God provides; the preparation of it is of His working.
3. God confers; the bestowal is of His grace and sovereignty.
4. God approves; He accepts it as complete in His sight, and will accept it in the last day. It is
a blamelessness, righteously—

(1) Procured.
(2) Bestowed.
(3) Regarded as perfect blamelessness.
III. This righteousness is “without the law”; entirely distinct from it and its purposes, belonging
to another province altogether.
1. It is not provided for by the law.
2. It derives no aid, direction, efficiency of any kind from the law.
3. It has no reference to, or connection with the law, except as the law shows the necessity
which is to be met.
III. It is witnessed or testified to as a Divine provision, both by the law which reveals the sin,
and by the prophecy which denounces it.
1. As being needed. The law, in the book or in the heart, gives silent assent to its necessity,
by being dumb with regard to any other means of justification.
2. As being possible. In all the voice of the law, as God has spoken it, there is mingled an
intimation of a possible pardon, not from the law, but from the mercy of God.
3. As being provided. In all the written law and prophecy of the Old Testament free pardon,
as righteousness of God, is formally announced. The “righteousness” of the gospel pardon—
(a) Is no new thing. Obtained by Abel, Enoch, Abraham, without the law.
(b) Is manifested now in the means of its provision, the fulness of love that provides
it, the signs and seals of its Divine approval, and the completeness of its restoration
to favour and privilege.
(c) Is in perfect harmony with the law, though belonging to another sphere; since it
recognises, respects, and meets the claims of the law, and provides for its
maintenance as a righteous rule of life; so the law readily witnesses it.
IV. This “righteousness” has always been obtained by faith (see chap. 4). Now by faith which
rests not only in God as the pardoner, but also in Christ as the procurer of pardon. Faith—
1. Assents to the necessity and sufficiency of this righteousness.
2. Consents to its bestowal.
3. Relies on the work of Christ and the word of promise.
4. Claims, seeks, grasps, and holds this righteousness.
V. It is brought unto all in the gospel manifestation, and conferred upon all that believe, without
distinction.
1. The need is universal; so the remedy.
2. No distinction in the condemnation (see Rom_2:6-11); none in the justifying.
3. Faith a condition of which all are capable; and the only thing of which any are capable
(verse 23).
(1) All have actually transgressed.
(2) All have thus “fallen behind in the race” for the Divine approval, or giving of glory
(Rom_1:10).

(3) All have made it impossible that they should be justified by law.
(4) God, therefore, since the provision is as large as the need, puts it within the reach of
all. (W. Griffiths.)
Justifying righteousness
Of all the subjects there is none so important as—How can man be just with God? and yet there
is none as to which men are so easily deluded. Conscience tells the man that he has sinned, and
yet, when asked, How do you expect to obtain future happiness?—he either evades the question,
or shelters himself in some refuge of lies. And the reason is that the man is utterly blind to his
true condition, he knows not the malignity of the disease, and cannot, therefore, apprehend the
remedy. Ere a sinner can even understand the gospel, he must see and realise his own true
position under the government of God. His position is plainly this: he has transgressed the law,
and lies under sentence of death. How, then, can he be restored to the favour of God? How can
the government of God remain unchangeable whilst this creature is saved? To this question you
have the answer, that the sinner is justified and saved by means of a righteousness. This appears
from the text, and from the nature of the case. It was righteousness that God required of man at
first, it was failing to yield it that he lost his title to life; and as the character of God is
unchangeable, it is only when he can plead a righteousness ample as the demands of the law that
he can be restored to favour.
I. This righteousness is not the sinner’s own, but that of another (see also Rom_1:17-18; Rom
3:20). And yet, in the face of this, multitudes seek to enter heaven by a door which their own
sins have closed against them. Ask that man of the world what is the foundation of his hope for
eternity, and his answer is, that he has never yet been guilty of open, flagrant transgression. Ask
that sensualist, and his answer is that he trusts his charitable deeds will atone for these
infirmities. The professor of religion answers that he does his best, that he is sincere, and that he
trusts God will take the will for the deed. But ye who would be justified by your obedience to the
law, have ye really considered what the law requires? It demands perfect obedience, and
condemns the least transgression. Have you such a righteousness as this? Is it not, therefore,
clear, that if ever the law relaxes its hold of you, the reason must be not your righteousness, but
the righteousness of another?
II. This righteousness can only be known by revelation. Being a righteousness provided by God,
none but God can discover it. It was revealed at first in Eden as the ground of the sinner’s hope—
the Jewish ritual was a continued revelation of it—the prophets bore testimony to it, speaking of
Him who should magnify the law, and make it honourable, and the whole New Testament is a
bright revelation that God has provided a righteousness, through which He can be just when He
justifies the ungodly. An awakened conscience tells the sinner that he has no resources of his
own wherewith to meet the demands of a violated law; and, if he looks around and puts the
question to all creation, How can God be righteous, and I be saved? Creation remains silent, and
is covered with darkness. But a voice comes from the Bible which saves him from despair
(Rom_10:6-9).
III. This righteousness was wrought out in human nature. The circumstances rendered this
necessary. It was on earth that God was dishonoured, and on earth therefore must He be
glorified. “The children were partakers of flesh and blood,” and their Redeemer therefore “must
take part of the same.” The first revelation of this righteousness, accordingly, was made in the
promise, that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head; and, in due time, this
promise was fulfilled in the Second Adam, standing in the room of His people as their
representative and head (Rom_5:19). He who was thus born of a woman, was “made under the

law”; that is to say, He met the law as His people’s surety, and fulfilled to the uttermost all its
demands against them.
IV. This righteousness is the righteousness of God. True, the Redeemer was a man; but under
that veil of humanity, faith beholds Jehovah. Without this were the case, the salvation of His
people was impossible. He had to make atonement for their sin, but the righteousness of a mere
creature would have been utterly insufficient, for a creature owes to God already all the
obedience he can yield. The righteousness, therefore, through which the sinner is justified is the
righteousness of a Divine person. You accordingly read that this is the name wherewith He shall
be called, Jehovah our Righteousness. It is the righteousness of the Mediator, of God manifest in
the flesh, of Him who is God and man in two distinct natures and one person; and as such it
answers, yea, more than answers, all the demands of a violated law. For what higher honour can
the law receive than that God Himself became its servant, and obeyed all its commands?
V. This righteousness “is unto all.” It is so completely put within the sinner’s reach, that if he
once hears of it he cannot perish, without putting it from him and rejecting it. The brazen
serpent was God’s free gift to all—all were commanded to look to it; and just as Moses lifted up
the serpent in the wilderness, so has the Son of Man been lifted up, etc. The cities of refuge were
open to every manslayer. And so it is with the righteousness of Christ; every sinner who hears of
it is invited and commanded to flee for refuge.
VI. This righteousness is upon all that believe. The believer is clothed and covered with it. Being
one with Christ by faith, Christ’s righteousness is his own; he is dealt with as one who obeyed
when Christ obeyed, as one who suffered when Christ suffered, as one who is, therefore, as
righteous as Christ is. (A. M. McGillivray.)
Romans 3:23
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.
Sin as a fact
I. The necessity of a clear sense of sin.
1. The gospel is a glorious remedy for a universal and otherwise incurable disease; and the
first step must ever be to make us sensible of that disease. For one of its most dangerous
symptoms is, that it makes men insensible of it. And, seeing that the remedy is not one
which can be simply taken once for all, but requires long application, a man must be very
thoroughly persuaded that he has the disease before he will take the necessary trouble to be
cured of it. Let us try and see what “all having sinned” means.
2. When any of us looks cut upon mankind, or within himself, one thing can hardly fail to
strike him. It is the presence of evil. From the first, man’s history has been a history of going
wrong and doing wrong. From the first, our own personal history has been a history of
interrupted good and interfering bad.
3. Some have said, “Don’t tell people about it; forget that there is evil in yourself; and you
and they will become good. It may be true that there is such a dark spot in nature; but gazing
upon it is painful and useless; look at the bright side.” But do you suppose that evil in our
nature can be thus got rid of? Try it for a day—for an hour; then take strict unsparing
account. And if more time is wanted, try it for a year; then retire and trace your path during
the time. Does not every man see that it would be simply the tale of the silly ostrich over
again, which imagines itself safe from the hunter by hiding him from its sight? No; a man

who wants to get rid of evil must open his eyes to it, stand face to face with it, and conquer it.
II. Sin is distinguished from every other evil.
1. There are bodily pain, discomfort, misery, common to us and to all. Now, if we can
manage to flee away from them, we thereby get rid of them. We need not study their nature.
But the man who wishes to avoid evil in this world must be awake and alive to the forms and
accesses of evil. His very safety consists in it. Therefore evil is a matter of a totally different
kind from bodily pain, misery, or death.
2. Evil is not by any means our only inward source of annoyance and hindrance. Everyone
has defects and infirmities. But none of these do we look upon as we look upon evil. Let it be
shown that we are dull, or feeble, or inferior to some others, we put up with it, we excuse it,
we make ourselves as comfortable as we may under it; but let it be once shown that we have
wished, said, done, that which is evil, and we know at once that there is no excuse for it. We
may try to show that we did it inadvertently, or by force of circumstances, or in some way to
lessen our own share in it, but the very labour to construct an excuse shows that we hold the
evil itself, as evil, to be inexcusable. So far, then, this evil is something which our nature
itself teaches us to revolt from and abhor. No son of man ever said or could say, from his
inmost heart, “Evil, be thou my good.” It requires more than man ever to say this.
III. Sin is the transgression of law.
1. What we have said shows that there is a law implanted in our nature by which evil is
avoided and good desired. All our laws, public opinion, even our ways of thinking and
speaking, are founded on this.
2. Now, when man says or acts evil, what sort of a thing does he do? Is it a necessary
condition of our lives that we must enter into compact with evil? Certainly not. Every protest
against, resistance to, victory over it, proves that evil is not necessary to our being. But true
as this is, the freedom from and victory over evil is not that after which all men are striving.
One man seeks sensual gratification; another wealth; a third power; a fourth reputation, etc.,
etc.; and so, not man’s highest aim to be good, but an aim very far below this is followed by
even the best of mankind sometimes. Now every one of these lower objects, if followed as an
object, does necessarily bring a man into contact and compromise with evil. Greed,
intemperance, injustice, unkindness, overweening opinion of self, and a hundred other evil
things beset everyone in such courses of life.
3. When a man lives such a course he is disobeying that great first law of our being by which
we choose the good and abhor the evil. Now, whenever we do this we sin. “All sin is
transgression of law.”
4. Now, sin is committed against a person. And this law of good and evil of which we have
been speaking, springs from that Holy and Just One who hath made us and to whom we are
accountable. All sin is against Him.
IV. All have sinned. And in dwelling on this, the fact that all men have inherited the disposition
to sin, necessarily comes first. And, inheriting this disposition, but with it inheriting also the
great inward law of conscience warning us against evil, we have again and again followed, not
the good law, but the evil propensity. In wayward childhood this has been so; in passionate
youth; in calm, deliberate manhood. Now, then, this being so, can sin be safe? Can a sinner be
happy? Sin is and must be the ruin of man, body and soul, here and hereafter. (Dean Alford.)
The charge of sin universal

I. The charge here brought is that of having sinned, and a most solemn and awful charge it is.
“Fools,” indeed, “make a mock at sin”; and that they do so, is a proof of their folly. God is love;
and consequently His law requires love. To love God with all the heart, and their fellow beings as
themselves, is the essence of that law. To break this law is sin; and sin produces only misery and
ruin. To charge a person with having sinned is to charge him with having acted contrary to the
purpose for which he was made; with having failed to love and obey the best and greatest of
beings; with being guilty of the same conduct with that which cast the angels out of heaven, and
man out of Paradise. Surely this is a solemn charge. Do we want other examples of the evil of
having sinned? Why the Flood? why the fire upon the people of Sodom and Gomorrah? etc.
Because they had sinned. Or, to give a more awful and decisive example, why did the Son of God
die on the Cross? Because He had taken upon Himself the nature and the cause of sinners.
II. The persons against whom it is brought. “There is no difference; for all have sinned,” in their
progenitor and representative, and in their own persons also. But this is a truth unpalatable to
the pride of man. And under the influence of this principle he will be disposed yet further to ask,
“What! is there no difference? no difference between righteous Abel and wicked Cain? between
impenitent Saul and contrite David? Are they all equally guilty before God?” In one sense all
these persons are not alike. They have not all sinned in the same manner, in the same measure,
to the same degree. Here there is a wide difference between them. But in the sense spoken of in
the text they are all alike. They have all sinned; and here there is no difference. Though they may
not be equally guilty, yet they are all guilty before God.
III. The extent of the charge here brought. “All have sinned, and,” by so doing, “have come short
of the glory of God.” This expression signifies—
1. To fall short of rendering to God that glory to which He is entitled. He requires that all His
creatures shall glorify Him. He has created them for His glory; and when they fulfil the
purpose for which He created them, then they do glorify Him. Thus “the heavens declare the
glory of God.” What, then, was the end and purpose for which man was made? To love, obey,
and serve his Maker. By opposition to His will he comes “short of the glory of God.” Man, a
living, rational being, is placed, not like the other works of creation, under a law of necessity
which he cannot break, but under a moral restraint, by which he ought to be kept in the path
of duty. But he is not so kept by it. He dishonours God in his very gifts, and endeavours,
according to his power, to introduce confusion into His works, and to defeat His great and
gracious designs.
2. The failing to obtain that glory which God originally designed for man. God originally
designed man for a glorious immortality. But by sin he fell short of that glory; he forfeited
and lost it. This, indeed, was the consequence of not rendering to God the glory due to Him.
Having been unwilling to glorify God, he could no longer expect to be glorified with God.
Conclusion: Perhaps you say, “Why, this doctrine takes away all hope. Would you drive us to
despair?” No, not to a despair of salvation, but to a despair of justifying yourselves before
God. But in Christ there is a full and gracious pardon for all your sins; there is glory offered
to you again. (E. Cooper.)
The test of a sinner
A young man once said to me, “I do not think I am a sinner.” I asked him if he would be willing
his mother or sister should know all he had done or said or thought—all his motives and desires.
After a moment he said, “No, indeed, not for all the world.” “Then can you dare to say, in the
presence of a holy God, who knows every thought of your heart, ‘I do not commit sin’?” (J. B.
Gough.)

Man’s sinfulness and inability
I. It is universally admitted that there is something wrong in man’s nature.
1. In every one of us there is a something good which perceives a something bad; also
something which whispers of an ideal state—a kind of reminiscence of a lost condition.
2. To account for this it suffices if we think of our nature as having had, originally
controlling it, a supreme love which has been largely but by no means entirely lost. That in
us which accuses us when we do wrong and commends us when we do right cannot be sinful,
but must be holy. And so there is in us all a viceroy asserting kingship in the name of the true
Sovereign of our souls. As a matter of fact we look upon one another as beings not entirely
trustworthy. If man be not a depraved creature, why this universal suspicion? And yet we are
not so depraved as not to know that we are depraved.
3. It is often argued that we are here in a state of probation. But man as man has had his
probation and has fallen. Adam’s “tree of knowledge of good and evil” tested his obedience.
Our Tree of Life—Jesus Christ—tests our obedience. Only with a difference. The first man,
knowing only good, wanted to know what evil was. We, having in ourselves the knowledge of
good and evil, are put upon trial, whether we will adhere persistently to that which is good—
good personalised in Christ.
II. What does this condition mean?
1. There is suggested the explanation of incompleteness. Our nature, say some, is moving on
gradually towards perfection. Give it time and it will come out according to the highest idea
that the best and most intelligent man has of it. Unhappily, except under certain conditions,
and in a certain environment, man as he grows older does not grow better. And this idea
does not account for our sense of guilt. It leaves out too much. There are too many facts
which lie outside of it. It only covers a part of the ground.
2. It needs along with it the idea of depravation. The sense of not being right, of being
wrong, is in us all. And it is an internal trouble which men would get away from if they could.
But no man can get away from himself. No external condition can eradicate it. Men try all
sorts of devices to rid themselves of it. Sometimes they change their opinions, but that does
not alter the inward condition. The bad consciousness is there all the time, and there is no
other word but sinfulness which will express its nature. For it is certain that there are in man
not only defects which mean weakness, but also a parent defect which means guilt.
III. This degeneration is total. It affects the whole nature. Our nature is so connected, part with
part, that degeneration in one region means degeneration in every region. If a man be unjust in
his feelings he will be unjust in his thinking and action. It is the merest rubbish to talk of a man
being good at heart and bad everywhere else. Whatever affects the centre of our nature affects
also every part of it to the outermost extremities. If there be impure blood in the heart there will
be impure blood in every vein. And there is no kindness in any teaching which leads men to
assume that sinfulness is only an eruption on the skin and not a disease of the heart. Only “fools
make a mock at sin.”
IV. The view we take of this fact of sinfulness will influence our estimate of every other vital
truth. If sinfulness be only ignorance we need only a Teacher; if only disease, a Physician; if only
error, an Example. But if it be something more, we need in Him who is to deliver us from it a
power other than that possessed by the Teacher, etc. Sinfulness means ignorance, error, disease;
but it means a great deal more. In many a case it means that state of heart in which the idea of

God is more hateful than the idea of the devil. I have known fallen men and women who never
ceased praying “God be merciful to me a sinner,” and I cannot forget Christ’s words—“The
publicans and harlots enter the kingdom of God before you.” There are sins of the flesh which
destroy reputation, which bring misery, social degradation, and much else. There are sins of the
spirit which bring none of these, and yet which put men and women at even a farther distance
from God. Of what condition of heart is he who is amiable and placid until someone speaks to
him such a truth as “God is Love,” “God is Light,” “God so loved the world”? etc. To err is
human, but to contemn and reject the claims of Deity, that is not human, but fiendish. No one
has ever taken a true measure of what sinfulness is until he has considered it in this, its most
terrible form. I want you to feel “the exceeding sinfulness of sin,” for only then will you be able
to appreciate the exceeding goodness of God who “willeth not the death of a sinner, but that all
should come to repentance.” “Where sin abounded grace did superabound.” No man who looks
away from his sin to his Saviour need despair, but then he must look to Him as Saviour. If a man
can grow out of this condition of sinfulness by natural development; if every old man be nearer
to the ideal of manhood than when he was young, then a Teacher, etc., is needed; but if man is
helpless to deliver himself from sinfulness, then he who is to meet the necessities of the case
must be human to understand him, but more than human to deliver him from an enemy
stronger than man himself. (Reuben Thomas, D. D.)
Coming short of God’s glory
Different persons, according to the difference of their habits of thought, or their education, or
their moral attainments, take a very different standard of what sin is. But here we have God’s
definition—whatever “comes short of the glory of God,” that is “sin.”
I. God measures sin by the degree in which the act, or the word, or the thought, injures or
grieves him. This must be so. The only true rule for the estimate of any sin must be taken from
the mind of Him whose mind is law, and whom to offend against constitutes sinfulness. Do not
say, “Are not we forbidden to seek our own glory? How, then, can God seek His own glory?” For
the reason why no creature is to seek his own glory is because all glory belongs to the Creator.
What does it mean to “come short of the glory of God”? It may mean to come short of heaven, or
to be unworthy of any praise from God, or to come short of that which is indeed God’s glory—
His perfect image and likeness; to fail to reach, in its purity, the only motive which God approves
—a desire for His own glory. It appears to me that though all the other senses are included in the
words, yet that their great primary intention is the last.
II. This brings me to the motive of human action.
1. You who can read only what speaks to the outward senses, think most of words and
actions. And, as naturally, God will look at the sources more than at the streams of every
man’s moral being. So it will be at the last great account. All the deeds and sayings of a man
will then stand forth to give evidence to a certain inward state of the man, according to
which everyone will receive his sentence.
2. And yet even we judge of things by their motives. Why do we value the most trivial gift,
the act of a moment, a smile, a glance of the eye, more than all the treasures of substance?
3. Note some of the legitimate motives which may actuate us.
(1) It is legitimate to wish to be happy. Therefore God stirs us up by promises, and lifts
us up by beatitudes. It would be contrary to common sense to say that we may not do
anything for the sake of going to heaven.
(2) It is a step above that—to do or bear with the desire that we may become holier.

(3) But higher, because less selfish, ranges the motive of a true ambition to make others
happy.
(4) And still higher the lofty, Christ-like focus, concentrating the whole will upon this
—“Father, in me glorify Thyself.”
4. To all these principles of action, except the last, there attaches a shadow. The wish to be
happy, even where the things we desire are spiritual, may degenerate into religious
selfishness. The longing to be holy will often turn into morbid self-examination and a
restless disquietude. The ambition to be useful easily becomes vitiated with—I will not say
the love of human applause—but a desire to be liked. But the motive to do anything for God’s
glory has no shadow, and is that which makes all the other motives right. It is right to
endeavour to be happy, mainly because our happiness gives glory to God as the result of the
finished work of Christ. It is right to study to be holy, because where God sees holiness He
sees His own reflection, and He is satisfied. It is right to set ourselves to be useful, because it
extends the kingdom of God. Here, then, lies the wrongness of everything that is done on any
inferior principle—it “comes short of the glory of God.” (J. Vaughan, M. A.)
Missing the mark
The word “sin” alike in the Hebrew and the Greek means “missed the mark,” as an archer might.
When one is interested in rifle shooting the picture is easily realised and not easily forgotten.
I. The mark, the centre, the bull’s eye, that man is to make his aim through life, is “the glory of
God.”
1. And what is that? The outshining of God’s attributes; Christ is the brightness of His glory,
and the express image of His person. We can, at best, be but broken images, interrupted rays
of His light. But still that is what we are to aim at—becoming ourselves, and reflecting to the
world around us some images of the holiness, goodness, and love of God.
2. In this shooting we are a spectacle to men. See us they will, and judge from us the
character and the worth of the religion we profess. The various professions or trades we may
follow are but the courses which our bullets take amidst the various influences to the right or
to the left, to be allowed for by the shooter. Our bullets must pass through them without
erring, and in all alike the aim is to be one—to manifest the character of the God we serve.
Those occupations are not in themselves the true centre to be aimed at—they are but the
means of reaching the glory of God.
II. Missing this mark is sin. St. Paul lays it to the charge of all alike.
1. The standard is a high one—to aim directly and always at God’s glory. But, then, man
occupies a high position, made above all creation, blessed with faculties above all creatures
for being the glory of God; placed with opportunities of being so now, and the promise of
being more so hereafter.
2. Shall we complain that we are so high in the creation, or complacently stoop down from it
and forfeit the crown held out for us to take, like Bunyan’s man with the muck rake? Was not
he missing the mark of life? He took up, as many do, a handful of dirt—he lost the crown of
gold. We speak of men having made a good hit when they have succeeded in a telling speech,
or a successful speculation, or a fortunate match, but what have they hit if they have not
sought to honour God? Certainly not the glory of God, nor have they advanced the true
purposes of life.
3. Now a rifle is made to shoot straight; if it will not do so, however perfect the polish of its

barrel, or the finish of its lock or stock, it is useless, and you throw it on one side or break it
up. The more complete it seems the more vexed you are with it for its utter failure in the one
work for which you had it made. God has made us for the one object of glorifying Him, and if
we fail in that, then whatsoever else we have which decorates us—intellect, politeness,
science, art, position, wealth—all tend not to diminish but to increase our condemnation.
4. What our condemnation may be I do not pretend to fathom; but if the words mean no
more than that having been made for the highest purpose, and then having utterly failed, we
are henceforth cast on one side as useless, our powers broken up, and our opportunities
taken from us, they will mean enough to stir us to redeem the time. We should not like to
meet the exposure of such a shame. Pindar describes the return of a combatant from the
great National Games. He speaks of him as hiding himself along the byways, not venturing
to enter by the gates into his city, or to be seen in any public place. Why? Because he had
missed the mark. He went out in the name of his city, equipped by his fellow citizens, to win
honour for their name, and to give them glory. But he has failed, and he dare not meet them.
We have failed, and we must “all appear before the judgment seat, that everyone may receive
the things done in his body.”
III. To what does this lead us?
1. We must realise more and more our condition as sinners. Let any man solemnly ask
himself, How much of God has the world seen in me? How much of His glory have I
reflected?
2. We must go back to the same butts and shoot again for a truer aim. Go to your seat in
Parliament, or your books, or your shop, and there aim afresh at rising to the glory of God,
“forgetting those things which are behind,” etc. True, it will not be so easy now that one’s
hand is unsteadied by neglecting to aim aright; true, it will not be so simple now that many
Ere looking on and wondering what in the world you are changing for, to shoot straight
under their critical eye; but such sense of sin, such turning from it to God in Christ again,
such trusting hope that with His aid we may succeed, will bring with it His forgiveness for
the past and His guidance for the future; and we may yet, with His encouragement, hit the
mark and glorify Him. (Canon Morse.)
EBC, “THE ONE WAY OF DIVINE ACCEPTANCE
So then "there is silence" upon earth, that man may hear the "still, small voice," "the sound of
stillness," (
1Ki_19:12) from the heavens. "The Law" has spoken, with its heart-shaking thunder.
It has driven in upon the soul of man, from many sides, that one fact-guilt; the eternity of the
claim of righteousness, the absoluteness of the holy Will of God, and, in contrast, the failure of
man, of the race, to meet that claim and do that will. It has told man, in effect, that he is
"depraved," that is to say, morally distorted. He is "totally depraved," that is, the distortion has
affected his whole being, so that he can supply on his own part no adequate recovering power
which shall restore him to harmony with God. And the Law has nothing more to say to him,
except that this condition is not only deplorable, but guilty, accountable, condemnable; and that
his own conscience is the concurrent witness that it is so. He is a sinner. To be a sinner is before
all things to be a transgressor of law. It is other things besides. It is to be morally diseased, and
in need of surgery and medicine. It is to be morally unhappy, and an object of compassion. But
first of all it is to be morally guilty, and in urgent need of justification, of a reversal of sentence,
of satisfactory settlement with the offended-and eternal-Law of God.
That Law, having spoken its inexorable conditions, and having announced the just sentence of
death, stands stern and silent beside the now silent offender. It has no commission to relieve his
fears, to allay his grief, to pay his debts. Its awful, merciful business is to say, "Thou shalt not

sin," and "The wages of sin is death." It summons conscience to attention, and tells it in its now
hearing ear far more than it had realised before of the horror and the doom of sin; and then it
leaves conscience to take up the message and alarm the whole inner world with the certainty of
guilt and judgment. So the man lies speechless before the terribly reticent Law.
Is it a merely abstract picture? Or do our hearts, the writer’s and the reader’s, bear any witness
to its living truthfulness? God knoweth, these things are no curiosities of the past. We are not
studying an interesting phase of early Christian thought. We are reading a living record of the
experiences of innumerable lives which are lived on earth this day. There is such a thing indeed
in our time, at this hour, as conviction of sin. There is such a thing now as a human soul, struck
dumb amidst its apologies, its doubts, its denials, by the speech and then the silence of the Law
of God. There is such a thing at this hour as a real man, strong and sound in thought, healthy in
every faculty, used to look facts of daily life in the face, yet broken down in the indescribable
conviction that he is a poor, guilty, lost sinner, and that his overwhelming need is not now-not
just now-the solution of problems of being, but the assurance that his sin is forgiven. He must be
justified, or he dies. The God of the Law must somehow say He has no quarrel with him, or he
dies a death which he sees, as by an intuition peculiar to conviction of sin, to be in its proper
nature a death without hope, without end.
Is this "somehow" possible?
Listen, guilty and silent soul, to a sound which is audible now. In the turmoil of either secular
indifference or blind self-justification you could not hear it; at best you heard a meaningless
murmur. But listen now; it is articulate, and it speaks to you. The earthquake, the wind, the fire,
have passed: and you are indeed awake. Now comes "the sound of stillness" in its turn. But now,
apart from Law, God’s righteousness stands displayed, attested by the Law and the Prophets;
but-though attested by them, in the Scriptures which all along, in word and in type, promise
better things to come, and above all a Blessed One to come-(it is) God’s righteousness, through
faith in Jesus Christ, prepared for all and bestowed upon all who believe in Him. For there is no
distinction; for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God, being justified giftwise,
gratuitously, by His grace, through the redemption, the ransom rescue, which is in Christ Jesus.
Yes, it resides always in Him, the Lord of saving Merit, and so is to be found in Him alone;
whom God presented, put forward, as Propitiation, through faith in His blood, His blood of
death, of sacrifice, of the altar; so as to demonstrate, to explain, to clear up, His righteousness,
His way of acceptance and its method. The Father "presented" the Son so as to show that His
grace meant no real connivance, no indulgence without a lawful reason. He "presented" Him
because of His passing by of sins done before; because the fact asked explanation that, while He
proclaimed His Law, and had not yet revealed His Gospel, He did nevertheless bear with
sinners, reprieving them, condoning them, in the forbearance of God, in the ages when He was
seen to "hold back" His wrath, but did not yet disclose the reason why. It was with a view, he
says again, to this demonstration of His righteousness in the present period, the season, the
καιρος, of the manifested Gospel; that He may be, in our view, as well as in divine fact, at once
just, true to His eternal Law, and Justifier of him who belongs to faith in Jesus.
This is the voice from heaven, audible when the sinner’s mouth is shut, while his ears are opened
by the touch of God. Without that spiritual introduction to them, very likely they will seem
either a fact in the history of religious thought, interesting in the study of development, but no
more; or a series of assertions corresponding to unreal needs, and in themselves full of
disputable points. Read them in the hour of conviction of sin; in other words, bring to them your
whole being, stirred from above to its moral depths, and you will not take them either
indifferently, or with opposition. As the key meets the lock they will meet your exceeding need.
Every sentence, every link of reasoning, every affirmation of fact, will be precious to you beyond
all words. And you will never fully understand them except in such hours, or in the life which

has such hours amongst its indelible memories.
Listen over again, in this sacred silence, thus broken by "the pleasant voice of the Mighty One."
"But now"; the happy "now" of present fact, of waking certainty. It is no daydream. Look, and
see; touch, and feel. Turn the blessed page again; γεγραπται, "It stands written." There is indeed
a "Righteousness of God," a settled way of mercy which is as holy as it is benignant, an
acceptance as good in eternal Law as in eternal Love. It is "attested by the Law and the
Prophets"; countless lines of prediction and foreshadowing meet upon it, to negative forever the
fear of illusion, of delusion. Here is no fortuitous concourse, but the long-laid plan of God.
Behold its procuring Cause, magnificent, tender, divine, human, spiritual, historic. It is the
beloved Son of the Father; no antagonist power from a region alien to the blessed Law and its
Giver. The Law Giver is the Christ Giver; He has "set Him forth," He has provided in Him an
expiation which-does not persuade Him to have mercy, for He is eternal Love already, but
liberates His love along the line of a wonderfully satisfied Holiness, and explains that liberation
(to the contrite) so as supremely to win their worship and their love to the Father and the Son.
Behold the Christ of God; behold the blood of Christ. In the Gospel, He is everywhere, it is
everywhere; but what is your delight to find Him, and it, here upon the threshold of your life of
blessing? Looking upon the Crucified, while you still "lay your hand upon your mouth," till it is
removed that you may bless His Name, you understand the joy with which, age after age, men
have spoken of a Death which is their life, of a Cross which is their crown and glory. You are in
no mood, here and now, to disparage the doctrine of the Atoning Blood; to place it in the
background of your Christianity; to obscure the Cross behind even the roofs of Bethlehem. You
cannot now think well of any Gospel that does not say, "First of all, Christ died for our sins,
according to the Scriptures". (1Co_15:3) You are a sinner, and you know it; "guilty before God";
and for you as such the Propitiation governs your whole view of man, of God, of life, of heaven.
For you, however it may be for others, "Redemption" cannot be named, or thought of, apart
from its first precious element, "remission of sins," justification of the guilty. It is steeped in
ideas of Propitiation; it is red and glorious with the Redeemer’s blood, without which it could
not have been. The all-blessed God, with all His attributes, His character, is by you seen
evermore as "just, yet the Justifier of him that believeth in Jesus." He shines on you through the
Word, and in your heart’s experience, in many another astonishing aspect. But all those others
are qualified for you by this, that He is the God of a holy Justification; that He is the God who
has accepted you, the guilty one, in Christ. All your thoughts of Him are formed and followed
out at the foot of the Cross. Golgotha is the observatory from which you count and watch the
lights of the moving heaven of His Being, His Truth, His Love.
How precious to you now are the words which once, perhaps, were worse than insipid, "Faith,"
"Justification," "the Righteousness of God"! In the discovery of your necessity, and of Christ as
the all-in-all to meet it, you see with little need of exposition the place and power of Faith. It
means, you see it now, simply your reception of Christ. It is your contact with Him, your
embrace of Him. It is not virtue; it is absolutely remote from merit. But it is necessary; as
necessary as the hand that takes the alms, or as the mouth that eats the unbought meal. The
meaning of "Justification" is now to you no riddle of the schools. Like all the great words of
scriptural theology it carries with it in divine things the meaning it bears in common things, only
for a new and noble application; you see this with joy, by the insight of awakened conscience. He
who "justifies" you does exactly what the word always imports. He does not educate you, or
inspire you, up to acceptability. He pronounces you acceptable, satisfactory, at peace with Law.
And this He does for Another’s sake; on account of the Merit of Another, who has so done and
suffered as to win an eternal welcome for Himself and everything that is His, and therefore for
all who are found in Him, and therefore for you who have fled into Him, believing. So you
receive with joy and wonder "the righteousness of God," His way to bid you, so deeply guilty in

yourself, welcome without fear to your Judge. You are "righteous," that is to say, satisfactory to
the inexorable Law. How? Because you are transfigured into a moral perfectness such as could
constitute a claim? No, but because Jesus Christ died, and you, receiving Him, are found in Him.
"There is no difference." Once, perhaps, you resented that word, if you paused to note it. Now
you take all its import home. Whatever otherwise your "difference" may be from the most
disgraceful and notorious breakers of the Law of God, you know now that there is none in this
respect-that you are as hopelessly, whether or not as distantly, remote as they are from "the
glory of God." His moral "glory," the inexorable perfectness of His Character, with its inherent
demand that you must perfectly correspond to Him in order so to be at peace with Him-you are
indeed "short of" this. The harlot, the liar, the murderer, are short of it; but so are you. Perhaps
they stand at the bottom of a mine, and you on the crest of an Alp; but you are as little able to
touch the stars as they. So you thankfully give yourself up, side by side with them, if they will but
come too, to be "carried" to the height of divine acceptance, by the gift of God, "justified gift-
wise by His grace."
Where then is our boasting? It is shut out. By means of what law? Of works? No, but by means of
faith’s law, the institute, the ordinance, which lays it upon us not to deserve, but to confide. And
who can analyse or describe the joy and rest of the soul from which at last is "shut out" the foul
inflation of a religious "boast"? We have praised ourselves, we have valued ourselves, on one
thing or another supposed to make us worthy of the Eternal. We may perhaps have had some
specious pretexts for doing so; or we may have "boasted" (such boastings are not unknown) of
nothing better than being a little less ungodly, or a little more manly, than someone else. But
this is over now forever, in principle; and we lay its practice under our Redeemer’s feet to be
destroyed. And great are the rest and gladness of sitting down at His feet, while the door is shut
and the key is turned upon our self-applause. There is no holiness without that "exclusion"; and
there is no happiness where holiness is not.
For we reckon, we conclude, we gather up our facts and reasons thus, that man is justified by
faith, apart from, irrespective of, works of law. In other words, the meriting cause lies wholly in
Christ, and wholly outside the man’s conduct. We have seen, implicitly, in the passage above,
verses 10-18 (Rom_3:10-18), what is meant here by "works of Law," or by "works of the Law."
The thought is not of ritual prescription, but of moral rule. The law breakers of verses 10-18
(Rom_3:10-18), are men who commit violent deeds, and speak foul words, and fail to do what is
good. The law keeper, by consequence, is the man whose conduct in such respects is right,
negatively and positively. And the "works of the law" are such deeds accordingly. So here "we
conclude" that the justification of fallen man takes place, as to the merit which procures it,
irrespective of his well-doing. It is respective only of Christ, as to merit; it has to do only, as to
personal reception, with the acceptance of the meriting Christ, that is to say, with faith in Him.
Then come, like a short "coda" following a full musical cadence, two brief questions and their
answers, spoken almost as if again a Rabbinist were in discussion.
Is God the Jews’ God only? Not of the Nations too? Yes, of the Nations too; assuming that God is
one, the same Person in both cases; who will justify Circumcision on the principle of faith, and
Uncircumcision by means of faith. He takes the fact, now ascertained, that faith, still faith, that
is to say Christ received, is the condition to justification for all mankind; and he reasons back to
the fact (so amply "attested by the Law and the Prophets," from Genesis onwards) that the true
God is equally the God of all. Probably the deep inference is suggested that the fence of privilege
drawn for ages round Israel was meant ultimately for the whole world’s blessing, and not to hold
Israel in a selfish isolation.
We cancel Law, then, by this faith of ours? We open the door, then, to moral license? We abolish
code and precept, then, when we ask not for conduct, but for faith? Away with the thought; nay,

we establish Law; we go the very way to give a new sacredness to its every command, and to
disclose a new power for the fulfilment of them all. But how this is, and is to be, the later
argument is to show.
DETACHED NOTE TO Rom_3:1-31
It would be a deeply interesting work to collect and exhibit together examples of the conveyance
of great spiritual blessing, in memorable lives, through the perusal of the Epistle to the Romans.
Augustine’s final crisis (see below, on Rom_13:14) would be one such example. As specimens of
what must be a multitude we quote two cases, in each of which one verse in this third chapter of
the Epistle proved the means of the divine message in a life of historical interest.
Padre Paola Sarpi (1552-1623), "Councillor and Theologian" to the Venetian Republic, and
historian of the Council of Trent, was one of the many eminent men of his day who never broke
with the Roman Church, yet had genuine spiritual sympathies with the Reformation. The record
of his last hours is affecting and instructive, and shows him reposing his hope with great
simplicity on the divine message of this chapter, though the report makes him quote it inexactly.
"Night being come, and want of spirits increasing upon him, he ceased another reading of the
Passion written by St. John. He spake of his own misery, and of the trust and confidence which
he had in the blood of Christ. He repeated very often those words, Quem proposuit Deus
Mediatorem per fidem in sanguine suo, ‘Whom God hath set forth to be a Mediator through
faith in His blood.’ In which He seemed to receive an extreme consolation. He repeated (though
with much faintness) divers places of Saint Paul. He protested that of his part he had nothing to
present God with but miseries and sins, yet nevertheless he desired to be drowned in the abyss
of the divine mercy; with so much submission on one side, and yet so much cheerfulness on the
other side, that he drew tears from all that were present."
It was through the third chapter of the Romans that heavenly light first came to the terribly
troubled soul of William Cowper, at St. Albans, in 1764. Some have said that Cowper’s religion
was to blame for his melancholy. The case was far different. The first tremendous attack
occurred at a time when, by his own clear account, he was quite without serious religion; it had
nothing whatever to do with either Christian doctrine or Christian practice. The recovery from it
came with his first sight, in Scripture, of the divine mercy in our Lord Jesus Christ. His own
account of this crisis is as follows:
"But the happy period which was to afford me a clear opening of the free mercy of God in
Christ Jesus, was now arrived. I flung myself into a chair near the window, and, seeing a
Bible there, ventured once more to apply to it for comfort and instruction. The first verse I
saw was the 25th of the 3d of Romans (Rom_3:25); ‘Whom God hath set forth to be a
propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins
that are past, through the forbearance of God.’"
"Immediately I received strength to believe it, and the full beams of the Sun of
Righteousness shone upon me. I saw the sufficiency of the atonement He had made, my
pardon sealed in His blood, and all the fulness and completeness of His justification. Unless
the Almighty arm had been under me, I think I should have died with gratitude and joy. I
could only look up to heaven in silent fear, overwhelmed with love and wonder. But the work
of the Holy Ghost is best described in His own words; it is ‘joy unspeakable and full of
glory."’
HAWKER, “But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by
the law and the prophets; (22) Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ
unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: (23) For all have sinned, and
come short of the glory of God; (24) Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption

that is in Christ Jesus: (25) Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his
blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the
forbearance of God; (26) To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just,
and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
Here Paul arrives at the great object, which all along he had been preparing to bring in; and in
the very mention of which, his whole soul seems to be on fire, Jer_20:9. He had glanced at it
before, Rom_1:17. But here he dwells on it more particularly. And, what he marks as the
distinguishing feature of it, is, that it is wholly unconnected with any other, and with every
other, principle. But now, (saith he,) the righteousness of God without the law is manifested;
yea, saith Paul, it is witnessed by the law and the prophets. Both, joyfully give in their testimony,
to the complete, full, and all justifying righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ.
They gladly minister to proclaim their own nothingness, and Christ’s all-sufficiency, in a way of
justification. Reader! I beseech you, pause over this precious testimony, which God the Holy
Ghost hath here given, by his servant Paul, to the righteousness of God our Savior. Look at the
law in all its bearings. By the law, saith Paul, is the knowledge of sin. Yes! the law teacheth of sin,
shews what sin is; but cannot shew a righteousness which may save from it. This the Gospel only
proclaims. And the blessedness of it, and the fulness of it, and the compleatness of it, both the
law and the Prophets witness to with joy! Dan_9:24; Rom_4:25.
But , what I beg the Reader also not to overlook, in this precious statement, of the righteousness
of God our Savior, is, that it is a righteousness so universally suited to the Lord’s people, in every
department, whether babes in Christ, or old saints of God, that it is unto all, and upon all, that
believe, for there is no difference. Reader! calculate, if you can, the immense blessedness of what
is here said. First, of the righteousness itself, which is wholly of God. Not of man’s providing, but
of God’s appointing. Not of man’s merit, but of God’s free grace. No predisposing cause but the
everlasting love of God in Christ, having anything to do in the matter. Yea, faith itself, by which a
child of God is made to possess it, and enjoy it, hath nothing of merit by way of
recommendation. The Lord, who is the sole Author and Giver of this righteousness, is the sole
Author and Giver of faith also to receive, believe, and enjoy it, So that faith, as an act of ours, is
but the effect, and not the cause; the hand to receive, and not to promote, the vast mercy. The
highly favored soul, who is made a rich partaker of the blessing; to him it is given, to feel his
want of righteousness in himself, to behold Christ’s righteousness as every way suited to himself
and his wants, to accept on his bended knees the proffered mercy, and to receive it to the divine
glory, and his own happiness.
Secondly. This righteousness, is said to be, unto all, and upon all, that believe, for there is no
difference. No difference in the thing itself, neither in the application of it. For the Lord, whose it
is, gives it to all with an equal hand, and loves all with an equal love, and justifies all with an
equal freeness of grace. For, it is not what they are in themselves, but what they are in Christ,
which makes them the objects of the divine favor. It is blessed, yea, very blessed, to have a large
hand of faith to receive the larger portions of the grace of belief, to enjoy the Lord’s blessings of
every kind, with a greater fulness. But our enjoyment is one thing, and the Lord’s righteousness,
which justifies, another. He that hath little faith, and is in Christ, is as compleatly justified by
Christ, as he that hath the largest portions of faith to apprehend with greater delight his mercies.
By him, (saith the Apostle, that is, by Christ,) all that believe, whether strong believers or weak
ones, whether babes in Christ, or fathers in the strength of Christ; are justified from all things,
Act_23:35. And the reason is given. For the righteousness which justifies, is alike justifying, too
all, and upon all. It is unto them, and upon them; not within them, nor from them. And
therefore, being wholly out of themselves, and nothing within, no inherent holiness in the
creature, which some men talk of, but none know; there can be no difference in the receiver, or
in the act of justification by the Giver. For, as the Apostle adds in the following verses: All have
sinned, and come short of the glory of God. And, therefore, the justification of all, cannot but. be

alike the free gift of God, and not the smallest difference in man. Being justified (saith the
Apostle) freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.
In the close of this paragraph, the Apostle dwells very blessedly on the greatness of Christ’s
sacrifice; and on the grace of God, in the wonderful ordination of it: and, from the union of both
he shews, how Jehovah, in his threefold character of Persons, may, and indeed doth, justify the
believer in Jesus, while preserving his own glory, in the full perfection of all the rights of his
justice. Whom God (saith he) hath set forth a propitiation through faith in his blood. The Reader
will perceive, that I take no notice in this passage of those words, to be, which are in Italicks, and
which have no business there; for Christ was not then to be set forth; for this had been done
from everlasting. The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I
was set up from everlasting, Pro_8:22-23. And, Christ is said to have been, the lamb slain from
the foundation of the world!, Rev_13:8. And Christ hath been, and is, and will be, the same, in
the perpetual, and unceasing efficacy of his blood, to all eternity.
We do not meet with this word propitiation, but three times in all the Bible, once in this place
and twice in the First Epistle of John, 1Jn_2:2 and 1Jn_4:10. Christ indeed is both the
propitiation and the propitiatory. He is the propitiation, or sacrifice; the propitiatory, or mercy
seat and altar, on which that sacrifice was offered; and he is the high priest, or sacrificer, to
make the offering. The Jews were accustomed, on this account, to call the mercy-seat Ilasterion.
For here, in allusion to all the great events connected with the Person of Christ, and his Offices,
and Character; the Lord promised to come and meet his people, Exo_25:22. And, in the Person
of Christ only, can this meeting be, either in time, or eternity. Well might his Name be called
Wonderful! For, while all the divine Attributes meet in his Person, and shine in one full
constellation; all our sins meet on him, (so it is rendered in the margin of our old Bibles,
Isa_53:6) as centering upon Christ, not in Christ; and the Lord Jesus washing them all away by
his blood. So that Christ, in the fullest sense of the word, is the propitiation, and the only
propitiation for sin; having by that one offering of himself once offered, perfected forever them
that are sanctified, Heb_10:14.
22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus
Christ to all who believe. There is no difference,
?tW ed5v,Even the righteousness of God - The apostle, having stated that the design of
the gospel was to reveal a new plan of becoming just in the sight of God, proceeds here more
fully to explain it. The explanation which he offers, makes it plain that the phrase so often used
by him, “righteousness of God,” does not refer to an attribute of God, but to his plan of making
people righteous. Here he says that it is by faith in Jesus Christ; but surely an attribute of God is
not produced by faith in Jesus Christ. It means God’s mode of regarding people as righteous
through their belief in Jesus Christ.
(That the “righteousness of God” cannot be explained of the attribute of justice, is obvious
enough. It cannot be said of divine justice, that it is “unto and upon all them that believe.” But
we are not reduced to the alternative of explaining the phrase, either of God’s justice, or God’s
plan of justifying people. Why may we not understand it of that righteousness which Yahweh

devised, Jesus executed, and the Spirit applies; and which is therefore justly denominated the
righteousness of God? It consists in that conformity to law which Jesus manifested in his
atoning death, and meritorious obedience. His death, by reason of his divine nature, was of
infinite value. And when he voluntarily submitted to yield a life that was forfeited by no
transgression of his own, the Law, in its penal part, was more magnified than if every
descendant of Adam had sunk under the weight of its vengeance.
Nor was the preceptive part of the Law less honored, in the spotless obedience of Christ. He
abstained from every sin, fulfilled every duty, and exemplified every virtue. Neither God nor
man could accuse him of failure in duty. To God he gave his piety, to man his glowing love, to
friends his heart, to foes his pity and his pardon. And by the obedience of the Creator in human
form, the precept of the Law was more honored than if the highest angels had come down to do
reverence to it, in presence of people. Here then is a righteousness worthy of the name, divine,
spotless, broad, lasting - beyond the power of language to characterize. It is that everlasting
righteousness which Daniel predicted the Messiah should bring in. Adam’s righteousness failed
and passed away. That of once happy angels perished too, but this shall endure. “The heavens,”
says Yahweh,” shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they
that dwell therein shall die in like manner, but my salvation shall be forever, and my
righteousness shall not be abolished,” This righteousness is broad enough to cover every sinner
and every sin. It is pure enough to meet the eye of God himself. It is therefore the sinner’s only
shield. See the note at Rom_1:17, for the true meaning of the expression “righteousness of
God.”)
By faith of Jesus Christ - That is, by faith in Jesus Christ. Thus, the expression, Mar_11:22,
“Have the faith of God” (margin), means, have faith in God. So Act_3:16, the “faith of his name”
“(Greek),” means, faith in his name. So Gal_2:20, the “faith of the Son of God” means, faith in
the Son of God. This cannot mean that faith is the meritorious cause of salvation, but that it is
the instrument or means by which we become justified. It is the state of mind, or condition of
the heart, to which God has been pleased to promise justification. (On the nature of faith see the
note at Mar_16:16.) God has promised that they who believe in Christ shall be pardoned and
saved. This is his plan in distinction from the plan of those who seek to be justified by works.
Unto all and upon all - It is evident that these expressions are designed to be emphatic, but
why both are used is not very apparent. Many have supposed that there was no essential
difference in the meaning. If there be a difference, it is probably this: the first expression, “unto
all” NvLWAwL MJuW31u, may denote that this plan of justification has come “(Luther)” unto all men, to
Jews and Gentiles; that is, that it has been provided for them, and offered to them without
distinction. The plan was ample for all, was suited for all, was equally necessary for all, and was
offered to all. The second phrase, “upon all” xAyWAw_BRL M3JW31w21u, , may be designed to guard
against the supposition that all therefore would be benefited by it, or be saved by the mere fact
that the announcement had come to all. The apostle adds therefore, that the benefits of this plan
must actually come upon all, or must be applied to all, if they would be justified. They could not
be justified merely by the fact that the plan was provided, and that the knowledge of it had come
to all, but by their actually coming under this plan, and availing themselves of it. Perhaps there
is reference in the last expression, “upon all,” to a robe, or garment, that is placed upon one to
hide his nakedness, or sin; compare Isa_64:6, also Phi_3:9.
For there is no difference - That is, there is no difference in regard to the matter under
discussion. The apostle does not mean to say that there is no difference in regard to the talents,
dispositions, education, and property of people; but there is no distinction in regard to the way
in which they must be justified. All must be saved, if saved at all, in the same mode, whether
Jews or Gentiles, bond or free, rich or poor, learned or ignorant. None can be saved by works;
and all are therefore dependent on the mercy of God in Jesus Christ.

CLARKE, “Even the righteousness of God - That method of saving sinners which is not of
works, but by faith in Christ Jesus; and it is not restrained to any particular people, as the law
and its privileges were, but is unto all mankind in its intention and offer, and becomes effectual
to them that believe; for God hath now made no difference between the Jews and the Gentiles.
GILL, “Even the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ,.... A further
account is given of this righteousness: why it is called "the righteousness of God", and in what
sense revealed and manifested; see Gill on
Rom_1:17; Here it is said to be "by faith of Jesus
Christ"; not by that faith which Christ himself had as man, but by that faith, of which he the
author and object: the Alexandrian copy reads, "by faith in Jesus Christ"; and not by that as the
cause of justification; for faith is neither the efficient, nor the moving, nor meritorious cause of
it; no, nor the instrumental cause of it on the part of God or Christ: nor is faith the matter of a
justifying righteousness; for faith is a part of sanctification, is itself imperfect, is a man's own, as
it is implanted in him, and exercised by him; is here and elsewhere distinguished from
righteousness; something else, and not that, as the obedience and blood of Christ, are said to be
what men are made righteous and justified by: but faith is a means of apprehending and
receiving righteousness; it views the excellency of Christ's righteousness; it owns the sufficiency
of it; the soul by it renounces its own righteousness, submits to Christ's, rejoices in it, and gives
him the glory of it: now this is by, or through faith,
unto all, and upon all: not all men, for all have not faith, nor are all justified and saved: but
all that believe; which must be understood, not of believing any thing, nor of any sort of
believing; but of such, who truly and with the heart believe in Christ for salvation; and who are
here opposed to the wise philosophers among the Gentiles, had to all self-righteous persons
among the Jews. Though this character does not design any cause or condition of justification,
but is only descriptive of the persons, who are declaratively interested in a justifying
righteousness, which is said to be "unto", and "upon them"; that is, it is appointed, provided,
and wrought out for them, and directed and applied unto them, and put upon them as a
garment, and that upon all of them:
for there is no difference; of nation, age, or sex, or of state and condition; no respect is had
to persons or works; nor is there any difference with respect to weak or strong believers; the
righteousness is equally applied to one as to another, and one is as much justified by it in the
sight of God as another.
BiwahesE <by faith of — that is, “in”
Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe — that is, perhaps, brought nigh
“unto all” men the Gospel, and actually “upon all” believing men, as theirs in possession [Luther
and others]; but most interpreters understand both statements” of believers as only a more
emphatic way of saying that all believers, without distinction or exception, are put in possession
of this gratuitous justification, purely by faith in Christ Jesus.
for there is no difference.

gtsFo 9v422.Even the righteousness of God, etc. (115) He shows in few words what this justification is,
even that which is found in Christ and is apprehended by faith. At the same time, by introducing again the
name of God, he seems to make God the founder, (autorem the author,) and not only the approver of the
righteousness of which he speaks; as though he had said, that it flows from him alone, or that its origin is
from heaven, but that it is made manifest to us in Christ.
When therefore we discuss this subject, we ought to PROCEED in this way: First, the question respecting
our justification is to be referred, not to the judgment of men, but to the judgment of God, before whom
nothing is counted righteousness, but perfect and absolute obedience to the law; which appears clear from
its promises and threatenings: if no one is found who has attained to such a perfect measure of holiness, it
follows that all are in themselves destitute of righteousness. Secondly, it is necessary that Christ should
come to our aid; who, being alone just, can render us just by transferring to us his own righteousness. You
now see how the righteousness of faith is the righteousness of Christ. When therefore we are justified, the
efficient cause is the mercy of God, the meritorious is Christ, the instrumental is the word in CONNECTION
with faith. (116) Hence faith is said to justify, because it is the instrument by which we receive Christ, in
whom righteousness is conveyed to us. Having been made partakers of Christ, we ourselves are not only
just, but our works also are counted just before God, and for this reason, because whatever imperfections
there may be in them, are obliterated by the blood of Christ; the promises, which are conditional, are also by
the same grace fulfilled to us; for God REWARDS our works as perfect, inasmuch as their defects are
covered by free pardon.
Unto all and upon all,
(117) etc. For the sake of amplifying, he repeats the same thing in different forms; it
was, that he might more fully express what we have ALREADY
heard, that faith alone is required, that the
faithful are not distinguished by external marks, and that hence it matters not whether they be Gentiles or
Jews.
(115)
The words which follow , διὰ πίστεως Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ “ or through the faith of Jesus Christ,” mean not
the faith which is his, but the faith of which he is the object. They ought to be rendered “ faith in Jesus
Christ.” The genitive case has often this meaning
: “Εχετε πίστιν Θεοῦ — Have faith in (of)
God,” Mar_11:22
; “Εν πίστει ζῶ τὟ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ — I live by the faith of the Son of God;” [Gal_2:20;] it
should be in our language, “ live by faith in the Son of God.” This genitive case of the object is an Hebraism,
and is of frequent occurrence. — Ed.
(116)
The original is this, “Ut ergo justificemur, causa efficiens est misericordia Dei, Christus materia,
verbum cum fide instrumentum — When therefore we are justified, the efficient cause is God’ mercy, Christ
is the material, the word with faith is the instrument.” — Ed.
(117)
Εἰς πάντας και ἐπι πάντας He makes a similar difference in his expressions in Rom_3:30. This
righteousness, as some say, came to the Jews, as it had been promised to them, andupon the Gentiles, as
a gift with which they were not acquainted, and it was conferred on them. But the possession was equal and
belonged to all who believed, and to none else, whether Jews or Gentiles.
[Stuart
] connects these words with “” or revealed, in Rom_3:21. It is manifested to all, and
manifested for all; that is, for the real benefit of all who believe; in other words, it is offered to all, but
becomes of real advantage only to those who believe. But the simpler mode is to consider the words, which
is, as in our version, to be understood
. ‘Ερχο\ένη is the word which [Luther
] adopts. — Ed.
PULPIT, “
Even the righteousness of God through faith of Jesus Christ unto all
(and upon

all is added in the Textus Receptus, but ill supported) them that believe: for there is no
distinction. We observe that the expression here used is not ἡ διὰ πίστεως but simply διὰ πίστεως .
Thus διὰ πίστεως does not naturally connect itself with δικαιοσύνη Θεοῦ as defining it, but rather with εἰς
πάνταςwhich follows, and perhaps with reference to the πεφανέρωται of Rom_3:21 understood. The idea,
then, may be still that of God's own righteousness, manifested in Christ, unto or towards all believers, who
through faith apprehended it and became sharers in it. When St. Paul elsewhere speaks of the
believer's imputed righteousness, his language is different, so as to make his meaning plain.
Thus Rom_4:6, ᾧ ὁ Θεὸς λογίζεται δικαιοσύνην δικαιοσύνης πίστεως ; Rom_5:17, τῆς δωρεᾶς
τῆς δικαιοσύνης ; Rom_9:30 δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐκ πίτσεως ; Php_3:9, τὴν ἐκ Θεοῦ δικαιοσύνην ἐπὶ τῇ πίστει .
What we contend for is simply this—that the phrase δικαιοσύνη Θεοῦ means God's own righteousness,
which, manifested in the atoning Christ, embraces believers, so that to them too righteousness may be
imputed (Rom_4:11).
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
utW niIsαFor all have sinned - This was the point which he had fully established in the
discussion in these chapters.
Have come short - Greek, “Are deficient in regard to;” are lacking, etc. Here it means, that
they had failed to obtain, or were destitute of.
The glory of God - The praise or approbation of God. They had sought to be justified, or
approved, by God; but all had failed. Their works of the Law had not secured his approbation;
and they were therefore under condemnation. The word “glory” (δόξα doxa) is often used in the
sense of praise, or approbation, Joh_5:41, Joh_5:44; Joh_7:18; Joh_8:50, Joh_8:54;
Joh_12:43.
CLARKE, “For all have sinned : - And consequently are equally helpless and guilty; and, as
God is no respecter of persons, all human creatures being equally his offspring, and there being
no reason why one should be preferred before another, therefore his endless mercy has
embraced All.
And come short of the glory of God - 5εὗWΟροVπχΟόοεὗWο:νWᾧχὸ:ν οχΟW6VχΟ These words have
been variously translated. Failed of attaining the glory of God: Have not been able to bring glory
to God: Stand in need of the glory, that is, the mercy of God. The simple meaning seems to be
this: that all have sinned, and none can enjoy God’s glory but they that are holy; consequently
both Jews and Gentiles have failed in their endeavors to attain it, as, by the works of any law, no
human being can be justified.
GILL, “For all have sinned,.... This is the general character of all mankind; all have sinned in

Adam, are guilty by his sin, polluted with it, and condemned for it; all are sinners in themselves,
and by their own actual transgressions; this is the case of the whole world, and of all the men in
it; not only of the Gentiles, but of the Jews, and the more righteous among them: hence there is
no difference in the state and condition of men by nature; nor is there any reason from and in
themselves, why God saves one and not another; nor any room to despair of the grace and
righteousness of Christ, on account of persons being, in their own view, the worst of sinners:
and hence it is, that they are all
come short of the glory of God; either of glorifying of God; man was made for this purpose,
and was capable of it, though now through sin incapable; and it is only by the grace of God that
he is enabled to do it: or of glorying: before him; sin has made him infamous, and is his shame;
by it he has forfeited all external favours, and has nothing of his own to glory in; his moral
righteousness is no foundation for boasting, especially before God: or of having glory from God;
the most pure and perfect creature does not of itself deserve any glory and praise from God;
good men, in a way of grace, will have praise of God; but sinners can never expect any on their
own account: or of the glorious grace of God, as sanctifying and pardoning grace, and
particularly the grace of a justifying righteousness; man has no righteousness, nor can he work
out one; nor will his own avail, he wants a better than that: or of eternal glory; which may be
called the glory of God, because it is of his preparing, what he calls persons to by his grace, and
which of his own free grace he bestows upon them, and will chiefly lie in the enjoyment of him;
now this is represented sometimes as a prize, which is run for, and pressed after; but men,
through sinning, come short of it, and must of themselves do so for ever: or rather of the image
of God in man, who is called "the image and glory of God", 1Co_11:7, which consisted externally
in government over the creatures; internally, in righteousness and holiness, in wisdom and
knowledge, in the bias of his mind to that which is good, and in power to perform it; of all which
he is come short, or deprived by sinning.
Htarih Isαfor all have sinned — Though men differ greatly in the nature and extent of
their sinfulness, there is absolutely no difference between the best and the worst of men, in the
fact that “all have sinned,” and so underlie the wrath of God.
and come short of the glory — or “praise”
of God — that is, “have failed to earn His approbation” (compare
Joh_12:43, Greek). So the
best interpreters.
bt?(r Isα23.There is indeed no difference, etc. He urges on all, without exception, the
necessity of seeking righteousness in Christ; as though he had said, “ is no other way of
attaining righteousness; for some cannot be justified in this and others in that way; but
all must alike be justified by faith, because all are sinners, and therefore have nothing
for which they can glory before God.” But he takes as granted that every one, conscious
of his sin, when he comes before the tribunal of God, is confounded and lost under a
sense of his own shame; so that no sinner can bear the presence of God, as we see an
example in the case of Adam. He again brings forward a reason taken from the opposite
side; and hence we must notice what follows. Since we are all sinners, Paul concludes,
that we are deficient in, or destitute of, the praise due to righteousness. There is
then, ACCORDING to what he teaches, no righteousness but what is perfect and

absolute. Were there indeed such a thing as half righteousness, it would yet be
necessary to deprive the sinner entirely of all glory: and hereby the figment of partial
righteousness, as they call it, is sufficiently confuted; for if it were true that we are
justified in part by works, and in part by grace, this argument of Paul would be of no
force — that all are deprived of the glory of God because they are sinners. It is then
certain, there is no righteousness where there is sin, until Christ removes the curse; and
this very thing is what is said in Gal_3:10, that all who are under the law are exposed to
the curse, and that we are delivered from it through the kindness of Christ. The glory of
God I take to mean the approbation of God, as in Joh_12:43, where it is said, that “
loved the glory of men more than the glory of God.” And thus he summons us from the
applause of a human court to the tribunal of heaven. (118)
(118) [Beza ] gives another view, that the verb ὑστεροῦνται refers to those who run a
[Whitby ] give the same view. Others consider it to be “ glory” due to God, — that all
come short of rendering him the service and honor which he justly demands and
requires. So [Doddridge ] [Scott ] and [Chalmers ] But [Melancthon ] [Grotius ] and

according to what is said in Rom_1:21, “ glorified him not as God.” — Ed.
PULPIT, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. The "glory of
God," of which all men are here said to come short ( ὑσεροῦνται ), has been taken to
mean
(1) honour or praise from God. "Dei favore et approbatione carent" (Sehleusner). So
decidedly Meyer, Tholuek, Alford, and others. In this case Θεοῦ would be the gen.
auctoris, which Meyer argues is probable from its being so in Θεοῦ δικαιοσύνη . This
argument (which is not worth much in any case) tells the other way if, as we hold, it is
not so in the latter phrase. For the New Testament use of δόξα in the sense of "praise"
or "honour," 1Th_2:6 is adduced ( Οὔτε ζητοῦντες ἐν ἀνθρώποις δόξαν );
also Joh_5:44 ( ∆όξαν παρὰ ἀλλήλων λα:βάνοντες καὶ τὴν δόξαν τὴν παρὰ τοῦ :όνου
Θεοῦ οὐ ζητεῖτε ); and especially Joh_12:43, where δόξα is, as here, followed by the
genitive Θεοῦ without any connecting preposition: Ἠγάπησαν γὰρ τὴν δόξαν τῶν
ἀνθρώπων :ᾶλλον ἤπερ τὴν δόξαν τοῦ Θεοῦ ("the praise of God," Authorized Version).
But, even apart from the different, and in itself more obvious, meaning of the
phrase, δόξα τοῦ Θεου , where it occurs elsewhere, it is at least a question whether in
the last cited passage it can be taken to mean praise or honour from God. It comes
immediately after the quotation from Isa_6:9, etc., followed by "These things said
Esaias, when he saw his glory ( τὴν δόξα αὐτοῦ ), and spoke of him." Hence the
meaning of Joh_12:43 may probably be that the persons spoken of
lovedmundane glory (cf. Mat_4:8; Mat_6:29) rather than the Divine glory, seen in the
vision of faith, manifested to the world in Christ (cf. Joh_1:14, "We beheld his glory,"
etc.), and "loved" by those who have not the eyes blinded and the heart hardened. So,

even in the previous passage of St. John's Gospel (Joh_5:41, Joh_5:44), ἡ δόξα ἡ
παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ may denote man's participation in the Divine glory, rather than praise or
honour, while δόξα παρὰ ἀλλήλων may mean the mundane glory conferred by men on
each ether. These considerations commend, in the passage before us, the
interpretation
(2) "Significatur ipsius Dei viventis gloria, vitam tribuens (cf. Rom_6:4); ad quam homini,
si non peccasset, patuit aditus: sod peccator ab illo fine sue excidit, neque jam eum
assequitur, neque gloriam illam, quae in illo effulsisset, ullo mode tolerare
potest: Heb_12:20, et seq.; Psa_68:2; quo fit ut morti sit obnoxius: nam gloria et
immortalitas suut synonyma, et sic mors et corruptio.Absunt a gloria Dei, i.e. a summo
fine homiuis aberrarunt. At justificati recuporant spom illius glorise. Vid. omnino
c. Psa_5:2, Psa_5:11, 17; 8:30, etc." (Bengel). Further, the sense which the same
expression seems evidently to bear in Rom_5:2 of this Epistle is of importance for our
determination of its meaning here. We are not justified in understanding, with some
interpreters, any specific reference to the "image of God" (cf. 1Co_11:7, εἰκὼν καὶ δόξα
Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων ) in which man was created, and which has been lost by the Fall, there
being nothing to suggest it, or, with others, exclusively to the future glory, since the
present ὑστεροῦνται seems to denote a present deficiency. The general conception
appears sufficiently plain in Bengel's exposition above given, ACCORDING to which
"the glory of God" means the glory of the Divine righteousness ("sempiterna ejus virtus
et divinitas" Bengel on Heb_1:8), which man, through sin, falls short of.
["are constantly falling short" = "usterountai" = present tense stressing continuing action, i.e., keeping on
falling short.
VWS, “
Have sinned (
zzzzLαρτονLαρτονLαρτονLαρτον)
Aorist tense: sinned, looking back to a thing definitely past - the historic occurrence of sin.
And come short (pστερο{pστερο{pστερο{pστερο{νταινταινταινται)
Rev., fall short: The present tense. The A.V. leaves it uncertain whether the present or the
perfect have come is intended. They sinned, and therefore they are lacking. See on Luk_15:14.
The word is not merely equivalent to they are wanting in, but implies want under the aspect of
shortcoming.
The glory of God (τ|τ|τ|οἨνWνWνWνWᾧἐδόδόᾧἐὸ:νWὸ:νWὸ:νWὸ:νWοχῖWὑVχῖοχῖWὑVχῖοχῖWὑVχῖοχῖWὑVχῖ)
Interpretations vary greatly. The glory of personal righteousness; that righteousness which
God judges to be glory; the image of God in man; the glorying or boasting of righteousness
before God; the approbation of God; the state of future glory.
The dominant meanings of ᾧἐὸεWin classical Greek are notion, opinion, conjecture, repute.
See on Rev_1:6. In biblical usage: 1. Recognition, honor, Phi_1:11; 1Pe_1:7. It is joined with οὗRυW
honor, 1Ti_1:17; Heb_2:7, Heb_2:9; 2Pe_1:17. Opposed to ῶοὗRήεWdishonor, 1Co_11:14,
1Co_11:15; 1Co_15:43; 2Co_6:8. With ἤ:ο87Wto seek, 1Th_2:6; Joh_5:44; Joh_7:18. With
λεRὼ’ό7Wto receive, Joh_5:41, Joh_5:44. With ᾧὁᾧ7RὗWto give, Luk_17:18; Joh_9:24. In the

ascriptive phrase glory be to, Luk_2:14, and ascriptions in the Epistles. Compare Luk_14:10. 2.
The glorious appearance which attracts the eye, Mat_4:8; Luk_4:6; Luk_12:27. Hence parallel
with ;v\‚:Wimage; L.jƒ_Wform; ?LοίωLαlikeness; ε?δοςappearance, figure, Rom_1:23;
Psa_17:15; Num_12:8.
The glory of God is used of the aggregate of the divine attributes and coincides with His self-
revelation, Exo_33:22; compare ljq?[l.:Wface, Exo_33:23. Hence the idea is prominent in the
redemptive revelation (Isa_60:3; Rom_6:4; Rom_5:2). It expresses the form in which God
reveals Himself in the economy of salvation (Rom_9:23; 1Ti_1:11; Eph_1:12). It is the means by
which the redemptive work is carried on; for instance, in calling, 2Pe_1:3; in raising up Christ
and believers with Him to newness of life, Rom_6:4; in imparting strength to believers,
Eph_3:16; Col_1:11; as the goal of Christian hope, Rom_5:2; Rom_8:18, Rom_8:21; Tit_2:13. It
appears prominently in the work of Christ - the outraying of the Father's glory (Heb_1:3),
especially in John. See Joh_1:14; Joh_2:11, etc.
The sense of the phrase here is: they are coming short of the honor or approbation which
God bestows. The point under discussion is the want of righteousness. Unbelievers, or mere
legalists, do not approve themselves before God by the righteousness which is of the law. They
come short of the approbation which is extended only to those who are justified by faith.
SBC, “Paul’s Evangel.
The history of God’s relations with human sin breaks into two—before Christ, and after Christ.
The death of Christ, which marks the point of division, is at the same time the key to explain
both.
I. Antecedently to the death of Christ the sins of men were passed over in the forbearance of
God. By offering His Son for the expiation of sin, God has cut off from men the temptation to
misconstrue His earlier toleration of sins, His forbearance to punish them, or His willingness to
forgive them. Then, in the antecedent ages, He did pretermit sin in His forbearance; but it was
only because He had purposed in His heart one day to offer for it a satisfaction such as this.
II. The same public satisfaction for sin, made by God in the face of the world, which is adequate
to explain His former indulgence to past sin, is adequate to justify Him in forgiving sin now. (1)
The propitiation instituted by God in His Son’s sacrificial death having been made amply
adequate to vindicate Divine justice, without any further exaction of penalty from sinners,
Christ’s death becomes our redemption. (2) Let God justify whom He will on the ground of this
redemption by the expiating blood of His Son, such a justifying of the guilty must be entirely a
gratuitous act on His part, undeserved, unbought by themselves, a boon of pure and sovereign
grace. (3) A way of being justified which is entirely gratuitous, hanging not on man’s desert but
on God’s grace, must be impartial and catholic. It is offered on such easy terms, because on no
harder terms could helpless and condemned men receive it. Only it lies in the very nature of the
case that whosoever refuses to repose his hope of acceptance with God upon the revealed basis
of Christ’s atonement, shuts himself out and never can be justified at all, since even God Himself
knows or can compass no other method for acquitting a guilty man.
J. Oswald Dykes, The Gospel according to St. Paul, p. 77.
GREAT TEXTS OF THE BIBLE, “Justification
For all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God; being justified freely by his grace through the

redemption that is in Christ Jesus.—Rom_3:23*24.
1. What is the position of a sinning moral being under the government of God? It is that of guilt, which
means that he both deserves and is liable to punishment. It is also that of depravity, or the polluting influence
of his sin upon his own soul. The way of relief from the first of these difficulties is through the atonement of
Christ. The method of relief from the second is through the regenerating and sanctifying work of the Holy
Spirit.
2. The object of the text is to explain the method of gaining relief from that element of guilt which involves
liability to punishment. The question is, how shall the iron link between sin and penalty be broken and the
transgressor be allowed to escape? But this is not all. Not only is it necessary that the connection between
sin and penalty should be broken; but also that the connection between obedience and reward should be re*
established. A real salvation involves not only release from penalty, but a title to life. Unless this title to life
can be achieved, conscience cannot be quieted, nor can any reliable hope of future well*being be kindled in
the heart. To accomplish both these ends, the sinner must be justified in the full sense of that term; and the
most important inquiry which can be raised by the mind of man is, “How can man be just with God?”
3. Manifestly man cannot justify himself. He cannot satisfy the penalty and yet live. He can satisfy it by
enduring it; but that is a supposition which implies his ruin, and his salvation on that contingency is self*
contradictory and impossible; he cannot be saved and at the same time lost. He cannot fulfil the law; for his
sin has so corrupted his moral nature that all the acts which flow from it are tainted, and he is unable to
render that perfect obedience which the law demands, and which alone can carry its rewards. How, then,
shall a transgressor of the law be justified?
4. The Gospel gives the answer to the question in the words of the text, “Being justified freely by his grace
through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” Since man cannot effect his own justification, if
accomplished at all it must be done for him by some one else. The Gospel answers the great question by
the doctrine of a substitute for the hopeless transgressor, undertaking to do for him what it was impossible
for him to do for himself; and the development of that wonderful conception constitutes the essence and the
chief distinction of the Christian religion. The development of the grand thought of a substitute for the sinner
embraces all the distinctive doctrines of Christianity: justification by faith, atonement, redemption, imputation,
the divinity of the Redeemer, the infinitude of the Divine grace, and the absolute effectiveness of the work
done for the deliverance of the transgressors of the Divine law.
The subject is Justification. The text contains—
I. The Need of Justification—“For all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God.”
i. Sin.

         ii. All have sinned.
         iii. Short of the Glory of God.
II. The Manner of Justification—“Being justified freely by his grace.”
i. Justification.
         ii. Of God’s Free Grace.
III. The Means of Justification—“Through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”
i. Redemption.
         ii. The Redemption that is in Christ Jesus.
I
The Need of Justification
“All have sinned, and fall SHORT
of the glory of God.”
i. Sin
1. We are constantly being haunted by something we have done or have not done, because we have done it
or have not done it. And this is not a characteristic of one man or another, but of all men. There are vast
differences between men, ranging from the heights of sainthood to the depths of depravity, but there is this
feature common to all—a sense that there is a gap between what they are and what they ought to be. There
are men who are “given over to lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness”; and there are men
so good that they make others feel as though they belonged to a better World; but if you could look into their
hearts and listen to their confession, you would find that the best as well as the worst are conscious of this
gap, this dislocation, this contrast between “ought” and “is.” There is none that doeth good, no, not one; we
have all “gone out of the way,” i.e.
the way of perfect, ideal goodness.
2. There are two ways of explaining this strange but universal fact in human life; and there is a third way
which more or less combines the two.
(1) The first way is that which till recently was universal among Christian thinkers—that man is a being who
was created not only innocent, but in a sense perfect, and that he has dropped into a lower condition which
is untrue to his real nature, and which shows itself by this feeling of remorse or sorrow for what he is. Man,

in other words, is a fallen creature.
(2) The second way of accounting for the fact of sin is quite a recent one, but it is held by probably the
majority of thinking people now. That theory tells us that man is not a fallen being, who began his career in a
better or perfect state, but one who has climbed up from a lower stage by a process of evolution. In this
respect, he is not different from other creatures, who have all climbed up from some lower form of life to their
present position. But he is different from all other creatures in this, that in virtue of a God*given gift, he is not
the mere creature of heredity and circumstances, but has a certain power to assist or retard his own further
development in every sense. He is a creature not made, but in the making; and he has been taken into
partnership by his Creator, so that he can help God (or hinder Him) in the work of perfecting his own nature.
In other words, there is a lower nature in him derived from his animal origin, strong and vital and full of
passionate desires. There is a higher nature in him, which is weak and frail and undeveloped, but of infinite
worth. There is thus a conflict ever going on within him between the lower nature and the higher, and
because he is within limits free to choose between this and that, he is able to help on or to hinder his higher
true self from gaining the victory over his lower.
(3) Now man is certainly a creature in process of development. He is advancing in a hundred directions; and
the impulse to advance is so powerful that, though it acts fitfully and is often CHECKED and thrown back,
it never really ceases to act; so that when humanity goes back in one direction it tends to recover itself, and
to realize in one way what it fails to realize in another. None the less certain is it that there is something
more the matter with human nature as it is than a feeling of not having progressed fast enough. The human
conscience testifies to a feeling of some moral disaster or calamity that has fallen upon it. It is haunted by a
stronger feeling than that of failure to attain. Some poison has mingled with the very blood of the soul, so to
speak. We come into the world weighted not only with our animal nature, but with a paralysis or sickness in
our higher nature itself. We cannot call our animal desires wrong; they are healthy and good in themselves;
they conduce to the continuance and vigour of our being; we cannot dispense with them. The mischief does
not seem to be there, but higher up, in the will itself. Now no mere evolutionary theory can account for this
fact of our nature; and it is this which the old theory of the Fall attempts to account for, and which, when
broadly conceived, it does account for. At some distant period of our history as a race—perhaps at the very
beginning—a wrong turn was taken, and its consequences, passed on through the mysterious law of
heredity, continue to this day. Man is a rising creature, with a principle of betterment deeply implanted within
his nature which has never been quite uprooted; but he is also a fallen creature, whose nature has been
thrown out of gear through the effects of habitual sin, which has largely paralysed the power to rise. And so
man is a distracted, struggling, tormented creature, dragged in different ways, unable on the one side to sink
contentedly into evil, and to forget God and goodness in that evil, and yet on the other unable to shake off
the incubus and burden of this sinful nature, which clings to him in spite of all his endeavours to free himself
from it, and makes him cry out, “Who shall deliver me from this body of death?”
Any theory or teaching which in any way blurs the meaning of sin as an awful and devastating mischief, for

which there can be no excuse, seems to me to cut at the very root and nerve*centre of the spiritual life. Sin
is the one (and perhaps the only) thing in the universe which it is impossible to justify; it is by definition the
thing that ought not to be. Once we begin to whittle away its meaning, and make it a stage in progress, a fall
upward, a necessary or inevitable episode in the experience of an evolving creature, we empty it of its
distinctive meaning, and strike at the very heart of every genuine moral effort. I can see that physical evil—
i.e.
suffering and calamity and limitation and loss—has many helpful functions to fulfil; but moral evil—sin—
is the one thing that has no function to fulfil; it is a purely destructive, disintegrating force, an essential blight,
a backward, downward, stumble of the soul; it ought not to be, or ever to have come into being, at any time
in the life of any creature of God’s making.
1 [Note: E. Griffith*Jones.]
The fact that the only perfect being, the only typical man whom the world has ever seen, was made perfect
through suffering, yet without sin, shows how essentially different the problems of suffering and sin are,
inextricably as they are interwoven in human experience. Suffering is one of the needful conditions of our
physical life, preserving us from danger, stimulating us into a larger life in virtue of our efforts to overcome it,
and sweetening our proud and self*indulgent nature by its discipline. But sin is the mortal enemy of our
highest, our spiritual life; and as such alone are we justified in dealing with it. That is the Christian view from
the beginning; and it is the only view that can safeguard the soul in its perilous journey through this
world.
1 [Note: E. Griffith*Jones.]
ii. All have sinned
1. From the first man that breathed in Eden to the last man that will look on the sun, we are one family,
under the rule and protection of one Providence, borne down by the same burden und looking for the same
“better land.” We are a living and unbroken unity—past, present, and to be. We are all conscious of the
same bias to wrong*doing. We are all sinners. “There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none that
understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together
become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.” It is not simply that our nature bears an
inherited taint and fault, called “original sin”; but we have yielded ourselves to voluntary sinfulness. Our last
condemnation comes not from our inheritance of original infirmity, but from that “personal estate” of sins we
have wilfully committed. It is the presence of the individual will in sin that renders it an object of punishment.
“All have sinned.”
The Apostle does not assert that there are not degrees of wickedness and lower depths of guilt; he only
declares, with uncompromising assurance, that all have come short of the standard. It is one thing for
human nature to possess some beautiful remainders of good; it is another question whether human nature,
even at its best, has enough good to save and restore itself. A famous temple of Rome, or of Greece, or of
India, lying in ruins, may have fragments of splendid sculpture buried among the rubbish; but the splendid
fragments cannot build once more the splendid temple. A young woman on her death*bed may have a face
as lovely as a poet’s fancy, with
The gleam

Of far*off summers in her tresses bright.
She is dying, nevertheless! The sinful heart may have tender passions and noble impulses; but they are only
soiled fragments—beautiful things hiding the horror of death.
2 [Note: H. E. Lewis.]
2. But how does St. Paul prove it? You will see the answer in the first two chapters of the Epistle to the
Romans. He proves it, not speculatively, but historically; not by logic, but by experience; not by development
of a theory, but by an appeal to fact. Mankind in his days was divided into two great sections—Jews and
Gentiles—with no consciousness as yet that the middle wall of partition which separated them from each
other had been finally broken down. Each section hated, each despised, the other. The Jew despised the
Gentile as a shameful reprobate; the Gentile hated the Jew as a grovelling impostor. But neither realized his
true condition; neither was at all awake to the fact that he had sinned.
(1) Certainly the Gentiles were not. Paul begins with them. They were, as a class, dead to all sense of sin;
they were in that meridian of evil which St. Paul calls “past feeling.” A stage there may have been in the
national as in the individual life, in which they felt their guiltiness; early in their career, before the love of
innocence was dead, before the tenderness of conscience was SEARED
; and later, too, the stage came
to them, as it comes to all, when “the Furies took their seats upon the midnight pillow.” But from the soul of
their youth the sense of wounded innocence was too often swept away like the dew from the green grass;
and from the social life it vanished in universal corruption. The life of Greece, for which some writers sigh as
having been so infinite in fascination, was bright, no doubt, in its first gaiety, in its ideal freshness. But when
youth was gone; when strength failed; when health was shattered; when on the dead flowers of life age shed
its snows; when Death came nearer and nearer with the dull monotony of his echoing footfall, and they saw
no life beyond—life in Hellas was not gay then. Take her at her most brilliant period, when her most immortal
temples were built, her most immortal songs written, her most immortal statues carved, and we see the
seamy side and ragged edges of the life of Greece revealed in the sensual wickedness of Aristophanes; we
see its fierce, untamed, soul*rending passions recorded in the stern pages of Thucydides. Her own poets,
her own satirists, her own historians will teach us that to have been naked and not ashamed was to have
been expelled from Paradise; to be past feeling for sin was to be removed utterly from even the possibility of
blessedness. And as for the Romans—
On that hard Pagan world disgust
And secret loathing fell;
Deep weariness and sated lust
Made human life a hell.

(2) Nor was the Jew. So far from feeling himself sinful, he looked on himself alone as being the just, the
upright, the chosen. He spoke with contemptuous disgust of the Gentiles as sinners and dogs and swine. Of
course, in a vague general way, he assented to vague general confessions, as when the High Priest laid his
hands on the head of the scapegoat, and said, “O God, the God of Israel, pardon our iniquities, our
transgressions, and our sins.” But, on the whole, in the Pharisaic epoch, which began even in the days of
Ezra, the Jews were infinitely satisfied with themselves. They held (as the Talmud often shows us) that no
Jew could possibly be rejected; that God looked on him with absolute favouritism; that the meanest son of
Israel was a prince of the kings of the earth. The pride which caused this serene unconsciousness of their
own guilt—the fact that they so little recognized the plague of their own hearts, was the worst thing about
them. They knew not that they were miserable, poor, blind, and naked. It was the self*induced callosity of
formalism. It was the penal blindness of moral self*conceit. “Are we blind also?” asked the astonished
Pharisees of Christ. And He said unto them, “If ye were blind ye would have no sin; but now you say, We
see, therefore your sin remaineth.” The fact, then, that Jew and Gentile alike were ignorant of their own
guilty condition was the deadliest element of their danger. For
When we in our viciousness grow hard—
O misery on’t!—the wise gods seel our eyes;
In our own filth drop our clear judgments; make us
Adore our errors; laugh at’s while we strut
To our confusion.
It seems to me that people get into the way of identifying sin with one kind of sin—the sin of the outcasts—
and forget the sins of character, of the Pharisees, and of the wicked, wise conspirators against human good
and happiness, who are eminently the Bible type of the sinners who have everything to fear.
1 [Note: Life
and Letters of Dean Church, 265.]
A soul made weak by its pathetic want
Of just the first apprenticeship to sin
Which thenceforth makes the sinning soul secure
From all foes save itself, souls’ truliest foe,—

Since egg turned snake needs fear no serpentry.2 [Note: R. Browning, The Ring and the Book.]
3. The Apostle proves that all have sinned by pointing to the facts around him. The facts of experience prove
it still. Take the irreligious world—the vast masses who do not even profess religion, who never set foot in a
place of worship. Take the vast army of unhappy drunkards, reeling through a miserable life to a
dishonoured grave. Take the countless victims of sins of impurity. Take trade and commerce, with its
adulterations, its dishonesties, its reckless greed, its internecine struggles between capital and toil. Are
these mere words, or are they indisputable facts? Is there no GAMBLING? Are there no wild, greedy,
dishonest speculations? Is the common conversation of men what it should be? Is the drink trade and its
consequences an honour to us? Does God look with approval on the opium traffic? Are the amusements of
the nation satisfactory? Can we regard with complacency the accessories of the turf? Are the streets of
London—reeking as they do with open and shameless temptation—what the streets of a Christian capital
should be? Would a Paul or an Elijah have had no burning words of scathing denunciation at what the stage
and the opera sometimes offer to the rich, and the music*hall and the dancing*room to the poor? How many
of the rich understand what it is to be generous? How many of the poor are alive to the duty and dignity of
self*respect? Are there no base and godless newspapers? Did not a great statesman write but recently
about “one of the thousands of lies, invented by knaves and believed by fools”? Is the general tone of what
is called society healthy—with its gossip, and its fashion, and its luxury, and its selfish acquiescence in the
seething misery around?
It may seem somewhat extreme, which I will speak; therefore let every man judge of it, even as his own
heart shall tell him, and no otherwise; I will but only make a demand: If God should yield to us, not as unto
Abraham, if fifty, forty, thirty, twenty, yea, or if ten good persons could be found in a city, for their sakes that
city should not be destroyed; but, if God should make us an offer thus large, Search all the generations of
men since the fall of your father Adam, find one man that hath done any one action, which hath past from
him pure, without any stain or blemish at all; and for that one man’s one only action, neither man nor angel
shall feel the torments which are prepared for both: do you think that this ransom, to deliver men and angels,
would be found among the sons of men?
1 [Note: Hooker, Works, iii. 493.]
I shall be reminded what a tragedy of misconception and misconduct man at large presents: of organized
injustice, cowardly violence, and treacherous crime; and of the damning imperfections of the best. They
cannot be too darkly drawn. Man is indeed marked for failure in his efforts to do right. But where the best
consistently miscarry, how tenfold more remarkable that all should continue to strive; and surely we should
find it both touching and inspiriting, that in a field from which success is banished, our race should not cease
to labour.
2 [Note: R. L. Stevenson, Pulvis et Umbra.]
4. The sense of sin, which in previous generations was so acute and full of torment, seems to have recently
lost a good deal of its edge and insistence. Men are not troubled as they used to be with a sense of the
awful reality and devastating nature of the evil in their hearts. And there are teachers who defend this

attitude. Sir Oliver Lodge, for instance, has said, in one of his many recent excursions into the realm of
theology, that the man in the street does not trouble himself much about his sins nowadays; and he seems
to justify this change of front. Another leading thinker has even more boldly said in effect that sin is only a
mistaken and misleading search—as it were, in the wrong direction—for the larger life, i.e.
for God; or in
other words, that it is only an attempt to realize one’s possibilities on the wrong plane of effort and
experience. This has shocked many people because of the blunt and vivid way it was put, and well it may.
None the less it expresses the unspoken idea of a great many thinkers. The old Puritan attitude of fear and
shame and sorrow at the thought of evil, the conviction that it is an offence in the sight of God, at which He
is infinitely pained in His heart, and which rouses His loving but awful indignation—this has given way to the
notion that sin, after all, is only an incident of development, that it is one of the necessary conditions of
ethical progress, and that, this being so, God cannot be angry with us if we go wrong on our way towards
getting into the right road. This attitude is combined with a theory that, since God is omnipotent, He will see
to it that in the end every sinner is somehow or other brought back to Himself. Men who sin may be going
out of their way to find Him, but find Him they will in the end and at last. Otherwise God can never be all in
all.
As a matter of fact, the higher man of to*day is not worrying about his sins at all; ? his mission, if he is good
for anything, “is to be up and doing.”
1 [Note: Sir Oliver Lodge, in Hibbert Journal, April 1904,
466.]
Said a woman to me last week: “I cannot feel that my heart is desperately wicked; have I to?” 2 [Note: T.
R. Williams.]
I knew a man once who lived a scandalously immoral life, and when he tired of it committed suicide quite
deliberately. He left behind him—for he was a man of letters—a copy of verses addressed to his Father in
heaven, in which he told Him that he was coming home to dwell with Him for ever. That was an extreme
instance perhaps; but extreme only because this man, being well*educated and accustomed to express his
thoughts in verse, was moved to put on record his absolute lack of any sense of sin.
3 [Note: R.
Winterbotham.]
5. A misconception as to the real nature of sin, and what it consists in, is one reason why many have little or
no consciousness of it; why they are not quickened to repentance and confession; why we hear so often
such statements as these, “I am no worse than others,” “I have never committed any crime,” “I do not feel
that I am a miserable sinner”; or the proud thanksgiving of the Pharisee, “God, I thank thee I am not as other
men are.” In all such cases God’s standard of requirement is fatally misunderstood; the length and breadth
of His law are not discerned; the love and purpose of His heart are most inadequately conceived. Once let
the light of heaven shine out in all its native brightness, and the darkness of earth will be revealed in striking
contrast. He who has felt the love of God, and has recognized Him as a Father, must have felt also the
baseness and guilt of sin—must, ere long, have said, like the Prodigal, “I will arise and go to my father, and

will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called
thy son.”
I have never yet met the man who disputed the fact of his being a sinner; but I have met with many who
admitted it, and yet lived on in the world as gaily as if it entailed no further consequences. When I proceed to
inquire how this can possibly be, it always strikes me, as the chief reason, that men do not give themselves
leisure—to reflect. All around me appear to labour under an indescribable distraction of mind. I cannot
otherwise account for the decided manner in which they admit many propositions, and yet do not draw from
them the conclusionsthat are obviously manifest. Since the hour in which I first clearly apprehended the one
truth that I am a sinner—against God, I likewise perceived, as clearly, that there is no business in life so
important as to recover His favour, and become His obedient child. Before that discovery, it always seemed
to me as if my life had no proper aim. It was then, for the first time, that I became aware for what purpose I
was living. No doubt I had a certain object, even before, but it was one of which I felt ashamed, and
therefore did not acknowledge even to myself. It was, in truth, to enjoy the things of this world, and to be
honoured in the eyes of men. And to thousands at my side, although they too are ashamed to confess it, this
is the sole wreath for which they strive. If, however, they would take time to reflect, the mere perceptions of
the understanding would show them the folly of their conduct. For, supposing our joys and hopes to have
their centre in this world, what a painful thought that we are every day withdrawing further away from it!
whereas, if eternity be our end and aim, how pleasing to think that to it we are every day advancing nearer!
1[Note: A. Tholuck.]
iii. St. Paul’s Definition of Sin
“All have sinned,” says St. Paul, “and fall short of the glory of God.” That seems to be his conception of sin.
That is sin in its essence. And that includes all under sin, leaving no room whatever for exculpation or
escape. For what is it to fall short of the glory of God?
1. The word “glory” (doxa) is used in the New Testament with two distinct meanings. It means (1) reputation,
or (2) brightness, especially the brightness or splendour which radiates from the presence of God. The
second must be the meaning here. It is the majesty or goodness of God as manifested to men.
The Rabbis held that Adam by the Fall lost six things, “the glory, life (immortality), his stature (which was
above that of his descendants), the fruit of the field, the fruits of trees, and the light (by which the world was
created, and which was withdrawn from it and reserved for the righteous in the world to come).” It is
explained that “the glory” was a reflection from the Divine glory which before the Fall brightened Adam’s face
(Weber, Altsyn. Theol., p. 214). Clearly St. Paul conceives of this glory as in process of being recovered: the
physical sense is also enriched by its extension to attributes that are moral and spiritual.
1 [Note: Sanday
and Headlam, Romans, 85.]
2. What is to “fall short” of this glory?

(1) The metaphor is taken from the racecourse. To “come short” is to be left behind in the race, not to reach
the goal. And the goal is “the glory of God.” We may take “the glory of God,” then, in the first place, in the
widest sense. To attain to “the glory of God” is (a) to enjoy His favour, (b) to be formed in His image, (c) to
live in His presence. These three together cover all that the soul of man can desire. They are the sum total
of happiness. There is nothing beyond. Adam had them all in Eden before his fall. He was made in the
image of God, and he enjoyed the favour and the presence of God. Sin robbed him of them all. And as
sinners we by nature come short of them all. “The carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to
the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom_8:7*8).
Surely this is the opposite of God’s favour! Then, “They that are after the flesh do mind the things of the
flesh” (Rom_8:5). Remember what the “works of the flesh” are, as St. Paul gives them in Gal_5:19*21.
Surely this is the opposite of the image of God! And then, “Without God in the world” (Eph_2:12). Surely this
is the opposite of God’s presence!
(2) But, in the second place, we may take this definition of sin to mean that men have not lived for the glory
of God. This goes deeper than acts; it reaches the motive of human action. We, who can read only what
speaks to the outward senses, very naturally think most of words and actions, because they are all of which
we can be certainly cognizant. And, as naturally, that great Spirit who reads thoughts as easily as He reads
words, will look equally, nay, more than equally, at the inward principles, at the springs more than at the acts
of the machine of life—at the sources more than at the streams of every man’s moral being. For here lies the
difference—we generally think feelings important because they lead to conduct; God lays stress upon
conduct because it indicates feelings. So it will be at the last great account. All the deeds and sayings of a
man will then stand forth in the light—each one in its clearness. But to what purpose? That the man may be
judged of those things? Certainly not. But they are witnesses, called up to give evidence before men and
angels, to a certain inward invisible state of the man, by which, and ACCORDING to which, every one will
receive his sentence and his eternal award. The real subject*matter of inquiry in that day will not be actions,
nor words, but motives.
(3) And, in the third place, the expression, “Fall short of the glory of God,” may mean—and probably in the
Apostle’s mind did mean—failure to reach the moral
glory of God, the inexorable perfectness of His
character, with which we must correspond in order to be at peace with Him.
Let us understand well the greatness of the Divine requirement from man, for it is the measure of the Divine
love. The love of God can be satisfied with nothing less than its own perfection. It is to this that He seeks to
bring us. Anything less than this, any coming short of His glory, is, in His sight, sin; a missing of our true
human aim; a failure to reach the stature of the perfect man—to be complete in Christ Jesus, to be washed
in His blood, to be clothed with His righteousness, to be filled with His spirit.
1 [Note: J. N. Bennie.]
The perfect revelation of that glory is in Jesus Christ, who is “the brightness of the Father’s glory, and the
express image of His person.” In Him, the image of God, men were originally created; in Him they live and

move and have their being. That same Divine Word and Son is the life and light of men, “the light that
lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” So in this way we reach a true harmony between the
declaration of St. Paul in the text, that a coming short of the glory of God is the universal human sin, and the
witness of the Holy Spirit, who, as expressly foretold by our blessed Lord, ever since His descent on the Day
of Pentecost, has been convincing the world of sin, because men believe not in Christ.
1 [Note: J. N.
Bennie.]
3. Notice, then, that in this statement that “all have sinned,” St. Paul is not charging every man with the
commission of crime, or of open acts of wickedness such as the world condemns and the laws of men
punish. But he declares that all, without exception, have missed the true aim of their being; have fallen short
of the mark which they ought to have hit; have failed wilfully in attaining the end of their life. They have not
entered into and fulfilled the purpose of God; they have not answered His gracious call; they have not gone
forth to meet Him, or yielded themselves to the patient drawing of His love.
It is a commonplace feeling, if not an actual belief, that if men have not done any great harm they cannot be
exposed to any great condemnation. But what is great harm? Is it not missing the very object you were
made for? A rifle is made to shoot straight; if it will not do so, however perfect the polish of its barrel, or the
finish of its lock or stock, it is useless, and you throw it on one side or break it up. The more complete it
seems to your eye in all its workmanship, the more vexed you are with it for its utter failure in the one work
for which you had it made.
2 [Note: F. Morse.]
“
Lift up your hearts.” “We lift them up.” Ah me!
I cannot, Lord, lift up my heart to Thee;
Stoop, lift it up, that where Thou art I too may be.
“Give Me thy heart.” I would not say Thee nay,
But have no power to keep or GIVE AWAY
My heart: stoop, Lord, and take it to Thyself to*day.
Stoop, Lord, as once before, now once anew;

Stoop, Lord, and hearken, hearken, Lord, and do,
And take my will, and take my heart, and take me too.
3 [Note: Christina G. Rossetti.]
II
The Manner of our Justification
“Being justified freely by His grace.”
The statement brings us face to face with that word, Justification, which played so great a part in
Reformation history, and which undoubtedly had so rich a content to minds like St. Paul’s, but which has
tended more and more to disappear out of our religious vocabulary. As for the word, that is a small affair; but
it would argue a serious loss in spiritual sensitiveness if we could endure to exist as children of God on any
other terms than those implied in the old phrase—justification.
i. Justification
1. Paul’s doctrine of justification may be summed up in three propositions: (1) God reckons, or pronounces,
or treats as righteous the ungodly who has no righteousness of his own to show (Rom_4:5). (2) It is his faith
that is reckoned for righteousness; faith in Christ is accepted instead of personal merit gained by good works
(Rom_4:5). (3) This faith has Christ as its object (Rom_3:22), especially the propitiation which is in His blood
(Rom_3:25); but as such it results in a union with Christ so close that Christ’s experience of separation from
sin and surrender to God is reproduced in the believer (Rom_6:1*11).
2. The use of the term “justification” in perpetual contrast with the term “condemnation,” settles the question
that justification is a forensic or judicial term, carrying the notion which is in direct contrast with the notion of
condemnation. “They shall justify the righteous and condemn the wicked” (Deu_25:1). “He that justifieth the
wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord” (Pro_17:15). “It is
God that justifieth; who is he that condemneth?” (Rom_8:33). The last is St. Paul, who also declares that
“the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification”
(Rom_5:16). These terms are so clearly opposed that the meaning of the one may be determined by the
other. Condemnation is a legal term expressive of a certain relation to law; it confers no personal or
subjective depraving influence on the character of the condemned person. It simply declares that the law, or
contract, has been violated, and formally decrees the subjection of the law*breaker to the penalties of the
law, but exerts no corrupting influence on his personal character. Justification, then, can only do the same
thing in the opposite direction; it determines a legal standing without exerting a personal subjective influence
on the character of the justified person, making him personally holy. This personal improvement which will
inevitably follow justification as one of its effects is due to sanctification; but it is not a part of justification
itself. It is not allowable to confound cause and effect.
3. The doctrine has been denounced as legalistic and even immoral. What has to be carefully remembered

is that Paul is not responsible for what a theological scholasticism or a popular evangelicalism may have
made of his doctrine. God does not impute righteousness to the unrighteous, but He accepts instead of
righteousness, instead of a perfect fulfilment of the whole law, faith. “Faith is reckoned for righteousness.” In
forgiving, God’s intention is not to allow a man to feel comfortable and happy while indifferent to, and
indolent in, goodness; but to give a man a fresh opportunity, a new ability to become holy and godly. Those
whom God reckons righteous, He means also to make righteous; and the gradual process of sanctification
can only begin with the initial act of justification. A man must be relieved of the burden of his guilt, he must
be recalled from the estrangement of his sin, he must be allowed to escape from the haunting shadows of
his doom, before he can with any confidence, courage, or constancy tread the upward path of goodness to
God. The man who accepts God’s forgiveness in faith cannot mean to abuse it by continuance in sin, but
must long for and welcome it as allowing him to make a fresh start on the new path of trustful, loyal, and
devoted surrender to God. Paul, it is quite certain, knew of no saving faith that could claim justification but
disown sanctification. To him faith was not only assent to what Christ had by His sacrifice done for man’s
salvation, but consent, constant and complete, to all that Christ by His Spirit might do in transforming
character. He knew of no purpose of grace that stopped short at reckoning men righteous, and did not go on
to making them righteous.
1 [Note: A. E. Garvie.]
Your little child does the wrong thing or says the false thing. Then comes sorrow, let us hope, and the
resolve to do better, and the old question, “Am I good now?” And you, sitting there half glad, half fearful,
know that the fault is not conquered yet, that the consequence of that slip, that fall, remains, a scar if not a
wound; but you recognize, too, that the aspiration is genuinely for the right, the face set towards victory. It is
not righteousness achieved, but you count the faith, the attitude of soul, for righteousness. You say, “Yes,
you are good now.” The declaration is of goodness unrealized as yet; but, nevertheless, actual to the heart
of grace, in hope and resolve. And with the declaration the shadow vanishes, and that confidence is restored
in which lies, perhaps, the child’s chief hope of achieving the goodness.
1 [Note: C. S. Horne.]
When Robert Browning sings—
’Tis not what man Does which exalts him, but what man Would do,
it may have a perilous sound. But by and by we discover that it is a profoundly true interpretation of life. It is
the will outreaching towards a perfection unattained, and, perhaps, even unattainable here. It is the
exaltation of the inward life; the motion of the soul towards the highest that it knows and sees. This faith
counts as righteousness in the sight of God.
All I could never be,
All, men ignored in me,

This, I was worth to God.
He counted what we would fain be, but were not, unto us for righteousness. There is a book of which some
of us are fond which describes the resolution of an old, old maid to adventure to Central Africa to preach to
the heathen. Of course, the thing was impossible; and, of course, at last, with many tears, she discovered
that she would never go. In human reckoning I suppose the will, the faith, the consecration of spirit, count for
nothing. Certainly she did not go. There was no actual achievement of the heroism proposed. But I believe,
with Browning, that this was her exaltation; and all she could never be she was worth to God; and that the
willed deed was reckoned in His sight as a deed done. This is the point at which even the law of God is
transcended by His free, matchless grace.
See the king—I would help him but cannot, the wishes fall through.
Could I wrestle to raise him from sorrow, grow poor to enrich,
To fill up his life, starve my own out, I would—knowing which,
I know that my service is perfect.
2 [Note: Browning, Saul.]
4. Justification is not simply pardon, and it is not sanctification.
(1) It is not Pardon. There is something more than forgiveness here. Your little child who has done wrong
pleads with you, “Am I good now?” “Yes,” you say; but the shadow has not passed from your face. And the
child knows that all is not right. “Am I good now?” “Yes.” “Then why don’t you smile?” Exactly. You must get
back to the old footing. Say what you like, even the sweetest tones of forgiveness do not always remove the
impression of a shadow across the face of God. The old familiarity and confidence are gone. Whatever be
the precise theological content of justification we all know what we mean, what we feel we want—THE

CLOUD off the sun, the doubt off the heart, the uneasy apprehension dispelled. We want to be at home
again, and walk once more as children of the light. That
is justification.1 [Note: C. S. Horne.]
It is unquestionably true that the real salvation of a breaker of the Divine law involves not merely an escape
from the penalty of the law, but a title to its reward. He needs something that will carry not only deliverance
from danger, but a security for happiness.
2 [Note: C. R. Vaughan.]
(2) It is not Sanctification. The different relations to it on our part are (a) that righteousness apprehended and
appropriated to ourselves by faith, in all its completeness; upon which God accepts and treats us as actually
possessing it; this is what is meant by our justification, or our status of present peace and fellowship with
God; and (b) that righteousness, which is Jesus Christ Himself, through the constant association and
participation of faith with Him, gradually but actually imparting Himself to us so as to become to us not only a

righteousness in which we believe, but one which at least we begin to possess; this is what in process or
progress we call our sanctification, and when it is completed it will be our glory or glorification.
ii. Gratis and Gracious
“Being justified freely (as a gift, gratis) by his grace.” The sinner is justified as an act of God’s free grace.
The act itself is the act of God in His judicial capacity, and includes in it the blotting out, the forgiving of all
original and actual transgression. All is blotted out. There is not one sin left unremitted. There is a complete
obliterating of all evidence of guilt against the sinner. And this act is done freely, graciously.
1. It is free on the part of God in the eternal purpose of it. For He might justly have left men to perish under
the guilt of sin.
2. It is free in the means He used to effect it, in the sending of His Son. He was the free gift of His eternally
free love. Nothing could have induced Him to this but His own free grace. “He so loved the world that he
gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
“The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
3. It is free in the laying of the punishment of our sins upon Him. It pleased the Father to bruise Him, to put
Him to grief. This could only be an act of grace. Hence, “herein is the love of God manifested, in that while
we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” This was the greatest, the highest proof God could give of His love
and grace. Here He went to the utmost in loving—when for our sakes He laid the punishment of sin upon His
own dear Son.
4. It is free in the covenant engagement with Christ for us. Christ stood for us, in our place and room. That
was arranged in covenant. Nothing but free electing grace could account for this. “According to his mercy he
saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us abundantly
through Jesus Christ our Saviour.” This is all of free grace, and only of free grace. It was according to free
grace that He “chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame
before him in love, having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself,
according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace wherein he hath made us
accepted in the beloved.”
5. It is free also in the offer of all this to us in the Gospel. It is offered without money and without price. “Ho!
every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, come buy wine and milk without money and without price.”
“Whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely.” Nothing can be freer or more cordial than this
invitation. The poorest is welcome. All are such; the feast is prepared for the poor. But the most bankrupt
sinner finds himself within the folds of this invitation.
6. It is free, finally, in the actual pardon of them that believe. They have nothing, absolutely nothing, on the
ground of which they can ask for this pardon. They must come absolutely bankrupt, poor and needy, that

they may obtain this unspeakable privilege from God. They have made no satisfaction for former
transgression. They have no penal or expiatory suffering to merit it. They can have no expectation of future
recompense. Whether, then, we consider the pardoner or the pardoned, justification is equally free—on the
part of God who justifies, and on the part of the sinner who is justified. They are justified freely by His
grace.
1 [Note: M. Macaskill.]
Rest over me in love, O piercèd One!
Smile on me sadly through my mist of sin,
Smile on me sweetly from Thy crown of thorns.
As the dawn looketh on the great dark hills,
As the hills dawn*touch’d on the great dark sea,
Dawn on my heart’s great darkness, Prince of Peace!
III
The Means of our Justification
“Through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”
1. Redemption. The word redemption or ransom is easily understood; it means the buying back, the paying
something for another. When a man had incurred a debt, and, in accordance with ancient law, had been
imprisoned or sold as a slave in consequence of that debt, the payment of the debt by another constituted
his redemption from slavery, his ransom from bondage. All mankind was in that condition before God, and
we are in that condition; burdened with the ten thousand talents of debt which we cannot pay; in bondage to
sin and Satan; sold under sin, tied and bound with the chain of our sins; our very lives justly forfeited to the
majesty of violated law. And from this condition Christ delivered us. As far as the effects to us are concerned,
we might say that He purchased us from this slavery, that He bought us by the price of His life and death;
redeemed us with His precious blood. And the figure chiefly used is not that He pays the debt, but that He
cancels it; forgives it, freely and unpaid; blots it out, tears it up, nails its no longer valid fragments to His
cross.
The Authorized Version does not keep the same English equivalent for the same Greek word, and the
words, “reconciliation,” “atonement,” “propitiation,” and “redemption,” seem to be used almost
indiscriminately in it. But in the Greek they are always kept distinct. We have here the word “redemption,”
and the Greek word is ἀðïëõôñþóéò
. In chap. Rom_3:25 the word we have is “propitiation,” and the Greek
word is ἱëáóôÞñéïí
. And we have in chap. Rom_5:11 the word êáôáëëáãÞ , translated wrongly in the text as

“atonement,” but rightly in the margin as “reconciliation.” Now, it is most important to keep these three things
separate, because they are the work of different offices of our Lord Jesus Christ. “Redemption” is the work
of the king. “Propitiation” is the work of the priest. And “reconciliation” describes the work of the prophet. And
if we want an all*round view of the work of the Lord Jesus Christ, we must combine the three, and then we
have Christ’s work—the work of the Anointed Prophet, the work of the Anointed Priest, and the work of the
Anointed King.
1 [Note: E. A. Stuart.]
It is simply impossible to get rid of the conception of a ransom from the New Testament. Christian piety
should surely be as willing to consider gratefully “all our redemption cost” as to recognize confidently “all our
redemption won.” We need not press the metaphor of redemption to yield a theory of the atonement; but the
idea of Christ’s death as a ransom expresses the necessity of that death as the condition of man’s salvation,
as required not only by the moral order of the world, but also by the holy will of God, which that moral order
expresses.
2 [Note: A. E. Garvie.]
Alas! my Lord is going,
Oh my woe!
It will be mine undoing;
If He go,
I’ll run and overtake Him;
If He stay,
I’ll cry aloud and make Him
Look this way.
O stay, my Lord, my Love, ’tis I;
Comfort me quickly, or I die.
“Cheer up thy drooping spirits;
I am here.

Mine all*sufficient merits
Shall appear
Before the throne of glory
In thy stead:
I’ll put into thy story
What I did.
Lift up thine eyes, sad soul, and see
Thy Saviour here. Lo, I am He.”
Alas! shall I present
My sinfulness
To Thee? Thou wilt resent
The loathsomeness.
“Be not afraid, I’ll take
Thy sins on Me,
And all My favour make
To shine on thee.”
Lord, what Thou’lt have me, Thou must make me.
“As I have made thee now, I take thee.”1 [Note: Christopher Harvey.]

2. The Redemption is in Christ Jesus. How has He accomplished it? Take the steps in order.
(1) Man, having broken the Divine law, is under condemnation. The Most High appears before us as the
moral governor of men, presenting to them His law, with the simple requirement, Obey. Obey and you shall
live—“Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth these things shall
live by them.” Disobey, and you shall die—“The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” But man has transgressed the
law, and thus incurred the penalty.
(2) The claims of the law have been fulfilled by the Lord Jesus Christ. He assumed man’s nature, was made
under the law, and fulfilled all righteousness. “I do always those things which please the Father” was the
utterance of His own consciousness; “I find no fault in Him” was the verdict of His foe; “Who did no sin,”
“Jesus Christ the Righteous,” was the witness of those who knew Him best; “This is my beloved Son, in
whom I am well pleased” was the declaration of God. In the life of Jesus, the law found its fulfilling and
complete embodiment. But though our Lord thus fulfilled the law’s claim, He suffered its penalty as though
He were guilty. His death was not the necessary end of the human life which He assumed. He was wounded
for transgression, He was bruised for iniquity, chastisement was upon Him, He made Him to be sin who
knew no sin. He was made a curse, “for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree,” He cried
that He was forsaken of God. Christ fulfilled the law perfectly, and yet suffered as though He had broken it
wholly.
(3) Christ’s twofold nature made His fulfilment of the law imputable. He was Man. The law imposed on man
must be fulfilled by man; it is not angelic holiness, nor heavenly holiness which is required, but human
holiness. The righteousness of the Man, Christ Jesus, was of this kind, wrought out under the same
limitations and conditions, and only with the same power as those under which the law was at first laid upon
Adam, and by which Adam might have stood. But the Word who was made flesh was God. Thus He was
under no obligation to the law, He owed it nothing on His own account. Had He been simply man, all His
righteousness would have been necessary for His own justification, but He was God, everlastingly and
infinitely holy, in and of Himself, and if as such He stooped to obey the law, and work out a human
righteousness, He needed not that for Himself, He was righteous already, it was a righteousness extra and
to spare, and the very righteousness man needs. And so of the Penalty which He paid. Since He was man,
that penalty was inflicted on man’s nature, but since He kept the law, no penalty was due from Him; like His
righteousness, it was something extra and to spare. But He was also God, which gives His sufferings an
infinite value, and makes them constitute a price paid, a curse endured for transgression, as great as God is
great. Here, then, we see in Christ a perfect obedience to the law, and the law’s penalty completely endured,
and both by human nature, and the point is—Christ does not need them for Himself, He has them both to
spare.
(4) God declares that He imputes the fulfilment of the law’s claims by Christ to those who accept Him as
their representative. That is to say, these things which Christ has to spare are handed over to such, and

regarded by God as on their behalf. That is the act of Justification by faith, the acceptance of Christ as our
representative, His righteousness reckoned to us, our penalty paid in Him, God declaring that He accepts
this Substitution in the case of all those who thus trust His Son. “Christ Jesus, whom God hath set forth to be
a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness, that he might be just, and the justifier
of him which believeth in Jesus.”
1 [Note: C. New]
Love bade me welcome; yet my soul drew back,
Guilty of dust and sin.
But quick*eyed Love, observing me grow slack
From my first entrance in,
Drew nearer to me, sweetly questioning,
If I lack’d anything.
“A guest,” I answer’d, “worthy to be here:”
Love said, “You shall be he.”
“I, the unkind, ungrateful? Ah, my dear,
I cannot look on Thee.”
Love took my hand, and smiling, did reply,
“Who made the eyes but I?”
“Truth, Lord, but I have marr’d them; let my shame
Go where it doth deserve.”
“And know you not,” says Love, “who bore the blame?”

“My dear, then I will serve.”
“You must sit down,” says Love, “and taste my meat.”
So I did sit and eat.
2 [Note: Christopher Harvey.]
24 and are justified freely by his grace through the
redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
puTgs (PκBeing justified - Being treated as if righteous; that is, being regarded and treated
as if they had kept the Law. The apostle has shown that they could not be so regarded and
treated by any merit of their own, or by personal obedience to the Law. He now affirms that if
they were so treated, it must be by mere favor, and as a matter not of right, but of gift. This is the
essence of the gospel. And to show this, and the way in which it is done, is the main design of
this Epistle. The expression here is to be understood as referring to all who are justified;
Rom_3:22. The righteousness of God by faith in Jesus Christ, is “upon all who believe,” who are
all “justified freely by his grace.”
Freely - δωρε?ν  dōrean. This word stands opposed to what is purchased, or which is obtained
by labor, or which is a matter of claim. It is a free, undeserved gift, not merited by our obedience
to the Law, and not that to which we have any claim. The apostle uses the word here in reference
to those who are justified. To them it is a mere undeserved gift, It does not mean that it has been
obtained, however, without any price or merit from anyone, for the Lord Jesus has purchased it
with his own blood, and to him it becomes a matter of justice that those who were given to him
should be justified, 1Co_6:20; 1Co_7:23; 2Pe_2:1; 1Pe_2:9. (Greek). Act_20:28; Isa_53:11. We
have no offering to bring, and no claim. To us, therefore, it is entirely a matter of gift.
By his grace - By his favor; by his mere undeserved mercy; see the note at Rom_1:7.
Through the redemption - δι?τ|ς}πολυτρώσεως  wDyRv`rRyoa(.vstrttr. The word used here
occurs only 10 times in the New Testament, Luk_21:28; Rom_3:24; Rom_8:23; 1Co_1:30;
Eph_1:7, Eph_1:14; Eph_4:30; Col_1:14; Heb_9:15; Heb_11:35. Its root (λύτρον  lutron)
properly denotes the price which is paid for a prisoner of war; the ransom, or stipulated
purchase-money, which being paid, the captive is set free. The word used here is then employed
to denote liberation from bondage, captivity, or evil of any kind, usually keeping up the idea of a
price, or a ransom paid, in consequence of which the delivery is effected. It is sometimes used in
a large sense, to denote simple deliverance by any means, without reference to a price paid, as in
Luk_21:28; Rom_8:23; Eph_1:14. That this is not the sense here, however, is apparent. For the
apostle in the next verse proceeds to specify the price which has been paid, or the means by
which this redemption has been effected. The word here denotes that deliverance from sin, and
from the evil consequences of sin, which has been effected by the offering of Jesus Christ as a

propitiation; Rom_3:25.
That is in Christ Jesus - Or, that has been effected by Christ Jesus; that of which he is the
author and procurer; compare Joh_3:16.
CLARKE, “Being justified freely by his grace - So far from being able to attain the glory
of God by their obedience, they are all guilty: and, to be saved, must be freely pardoned by God’s
grace; which is shown to them who believe, through the redemption, απολυτρωσεως, the ransom
price, which is in the sacrifice of Christ Jesus. The original is compounded of απο, from, and
λυτροω, I redeem, and properly means the price laid down for the redemption of a captive.
Comprehendit haec Christi απολυτρωσις, quicquid is docuit, fecit et passus est, eo consilio, ut
homines malis liberati, praecipue peccato, malorum fonte immunes, veram felicitatem
adipiscerentur. - Rosenmuller. This redemption of Christ comprehends whatsoever he taught,
did, or suffered, in order to free men from evil; especially to free them from sin, the source of
evils; that they might attain true felicity. And that it here means the liberation purchased by the
blood-shedding of Christ, is evident from Eph_1:7 : We have Redemption, 'FIju;q[’kOJgk'J;IuJ
'kL';IVJ'u;Iu, Through His Blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace.
See also Col_1:14, where the same words are found.
Λυτρα according to Suidas, is Lk’]IV:J:J;'JF'qxkILxO'JuFxqJxjxu]xqk'V:JxFkJ;[Jju;q[’'’]'kJ
€'q€'q[OJgIujxk'V A reward; or the price given to be redeemed from the slavery of the
barbarians. Schleusner, under the word απολυτρωσις, says, Negari quidem non potest, hanc
vocem proprie notare redemptionem ejus, qui captivus detinetur, sive bello, sive alio captus sit
modo, quae fit per pretti solutionem; quo sensu verbum απολυτροω legitur haud raro in Scripp.
Graecis. No man certainly can deny that this word properly means the redemption of a captive,
(whether he may have been taken in war or in any other way), which is procured by the payment
of a price. That the word also means any deliverance, even where no price is paid down, nobody
will dispute; but that it means redemption by a price laid down, and the redemption of the soul
by the price of the death of Christ, the above scriptures sufficiently prove.
GILL, “Being justified freely by his grace,.... The matter of justification is before
expressed, and the persons that share in this blessing are described; here the several causes of it
are mentioned. The moving cause of it is the free grace of God; for by "the grace of God" here, is
not meant the Gospel, or what some men call the terms of the Gospel, and the constitution of it;
nor the grace of God infused into the heart; but the free love and favour of God, as it is in his
heart; which is wonderfully displayed in the business of a sinner's justification before him: it
appears in his resolving upon the justification of his chosen ones in Christ; in fixing on the
method of doing it; in setting forth and pre-ordaining Christ to be the ransom; in calling Christ
to engage herein; in Christ's engaging as a surety for his people, and in the Father's sending him
to bring in everlasting righteousness; in Christ's coming to do it, and in the gracious manner in
which he wrought it out; in the Father's gracious acceptation, imputation, and donation of it; in
the free gift of the grace of faith, to apprehend and receive it; and in the persons that partake of
it, who are of themselves sinners and ungodly. The meritorious cause of justification is,

the redemption that is in Jesus Christ: redemption supposes a former state of captivity to
sin, Satan, and the law, in which God's elect were by nature, and is a deliverance from it; it is of a
spiritual nature, chiefly respects the soul, and is plenteous, complete, and eternal: this is in and
by Christ; he was called unto it, was sent to effect it, had a right unto it, as being the near
kinsman; and was every way fit for it, being both God and man; and has by his sufferings and
death obtained it: now, as all the blessings of grace come through redemption by Christ, so does
this of justification, and after this manner; Christ, as a Redeemer, had the sins of his people laid
on him, and they were bore by him, and took away; the sentence of the law's condemnation was
executed on him, as standing in their legal place and stead; and satisfaction was made by him for
all offences committed by them, which was necessary, that God might appear to be just, in
justifying all them that believe: nor is this any objection or contradiction to the free grace of
God, in a sinner's justification; since it was grace in God to provide, send, and part with his Son
as a Redeemer, and to work out righteousness; it was grace in Christ, to come and give himself a
sacrifice, and obtain salvation and righteousness, not for angels, but for men, and for some of
them, and not all; and whatever this righteousness, salvation, and redemption cost Christ, they
are all free to men.
'jsJtE <But now how is this for God's glory?
(1.) It is for the glory of his grace (
Rom_3:24): Justified freely by his grace - ft?…yaJm`Jdvy?nmn.
It is by his grace, not by the grace wrought in us as the papists say, confounding justification
and sanctification, but by the gracious favour of God to us, without any merit in us so much as
foreseen. And, to make it the more emphatic, he says it is freely by his grace, to show that it
must be understood of grace in the most proper and genuine sense. It is said that Joseph found
grace in the sight of his master (Gen_39:4), but there was a reason; he saw that what he did
prospered. There was something in Joseph to invite that grace; but the grace of God
communicated to us comes freely, freely; it is free grace, mere mercy; nothing in us to deserve
such favours: no, it is all through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ. It comes freely to us,
but Christ bought it, and paid dearly for it, which yet is so ordered as not to derogate from the
honour of free grace. Christ's purchase is no bar to the freeness of God's grace; for grace
provided and accepted this vicarious satisfaction.
&אדnןםלbונjustified freely — without anything done on our part to deserve.
by his grace — His free love.
through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus — a most important clause; teaching us
that though justification is quite gratuitous, it is not a mere fiat of the divine will, but based on a
“Redemption,” that is, “the payment of a Ransom,” in Christ’s death. That this is the sense of the
word “redemption,” when applied to Christ’s death, will appear clear to any impartial student of
the passages where it occurs.
תא_gnלbונ24.Being justified freely, etc. A participle is here put for a
verb
ACCORDING to the usage of the Greek language. The meaning is, — that
since there remains nothing for men, as to themselves, but to perish, being
smitten by the just judgment of God, they are to be justified freely through his
mercy; for Christ comes to the aid of this misery, and communicates himself to

believers, so that they find in him alone all those things in which they are
wanting. There is, perhaps, no passage in the whole Scripture which illustrates in
a more striking manner the efficacy of his righteousness; for it shows that God’
mercy is the efficient cause, that Christ with his blood is the meritorious cause,
that the formal or the instumental cause is faith in the word, and that moreover,
the final cause is the glory of the divine justice and goodness.
With regard to the efficient cause, he says, that we are justified freely, and further,
by his grace; and he thus repeats the word to show that the whole is from God,
and nothing from us. It might have been enough to oppose grace to merits; but
lest we should imagine a half kind of grace, he affirms more strongly what he
means by a repetition, and claims for God’ mercy alone the whole glory of our
righteousness, which the sophists divide into parts and mutilate, that they may
not be constrained to confess their own poverty. — Through the
redemption, etc. This is the material, — Christ by his obedience satisfied the
Father’ justice, (judicium — judgment,) and by undertaking our cause he liberated
us from the tyranny of death, by which we were held captive; as on ACCOUNT
of the sacrifice which he offered is our guilt removed. Here again is fully confuted
the gloss of those who make righteousness a quality; for if we are counted
righteous before God, because we are redeemed by a price, we certainly derive
from another what is not in us. And Paul immediately explains more clearly what
this redemption is, and what is its object, which is to reconcile us to God; for he
calls Christ a propitiation, (or, if we prefer an allusion to an ancient type,) a
propitiatory. But what he means is, that we are not otherwise just than through
Christ propitiating the Father for us. But it is necessary for us to examine the
words. (119)
(119) On this word ἱλαστήριον both [Venema ] in his Notes on the Comment of
[Stephanus de Brais ] on this Epistle, and Professor [Stuart ] have long remarks.

the Septuagint, the mercyPseat, תרפכ, and, as it is in the form of an adjective, it
has at least once, (Exo_25:17,) ἐπίθε\α cover, added to it. But in the classics it
means a propitiatory sacrifice, the word θῦ\α a sacrifice, being understood; but it
is used by itself as other words of similar termination are. It is found also in
[Josephus ] and in Maccabees in this sense. It appears that [Origen ] [Theodoret ]
and other Fathers, and also [Erasmus ] [Luther ] and [Locke ] take the first
meaning — mercy-seat; and that [Grotius ] [Elsner ] [Turrettin ] [Bos ] and
[Tholuck ] take the second meaning — a propitiatory sacrifice. Now as both
meanings are legitimate, which of them are we to take? [Venema ] and [Stuart ]
allude to one thing which much favors the latter view, that is, the phrase ἐν τω
αἵ\ατι αὐτου and the latter says, that it would be incongruous to represent Christ
himself as the mercyPseat, and to represent him also as sprinkled by his own
blood; but that it is appropriate to say that a propitiatory sacrifice was made by

his blood. The verb προέθετο set forth, it is added, seems to support the same
view. To exhibit a mercy-seat is certainly not suitable language in
this CONNECTION .
[Pareus ] renders it “placamentum — atonement,” hoc est “placatorem,” that is, “
or expiator.” [Beza ] ’ version is the same — “placamentum;” [Doddridge ] has “”
and [Macknight ], “ propitiatory,” and [Schleusner ] “expiatorem — expiator.”
The word occurs in one other place with the neuter article , τὸ
ἱλαστήριον Heb_9:5, where it clearly means the mercyPseat. It is ever
accompanied with the article in the Septuagint, when by itself, see Lev_16:2; but
here it is without the article, and may be viewed as an adjective dependent on on,
“” and rendered propitiator. Had the mercyPseat been intended, it would have
been τὸ ἱλαστήριον — Ed.
PULPIT 24.26, “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ
Jesus: whom God set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his
oeeTcEl()2(CUMBDC(E8i933V EdAOtELYDbBvEAG9ey?mskmcE"Repente sic panditur scena
hyh.GAef4EX1.GR.oQcEl56B7DEhGTEb0E2HbCpEgY6(b(Ehf.Eopposed to the impossible theory of
justification by law. And, as all sinned, so all are so justifiedpotentially, the redemption being
for all; cf. especially Rom_5:18. But potential justification only is implied; for the condition
for appropriation is further intimated by διὰ τῆς πίστεως following. The means whereby it
becomes objectively possible is "the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." Here, as throughout
St. Paul's Epistles, and in the Hew Testament generally, the doctrine ofatonement being
required for man's justification is undoubtedly taught, Christ being viewed as not only
manifesting God's righteousness in his life, and reconciling believers through his influence
on themselves, but as effecting such reconciliation by an atoning sacrifice. The word itself
( ἀπολύτρωσις ) here used may indeed sometimes denote deliverance only
(cf. Rom_8:23;Luk_21:28; Eph_1:14; Eph_4:30; Heb_11:35); but certainly, when used of the
redemption of man by Christ, it implies atonement by the PAYMEHT of
a ransom ( λύτρον or ἀντίλυτρον );
cf.Eph_1:7; 1Co_6:20; Gal_3:13; 1Ti_2:6; Rev_5:9; Mat_20:28; the ransom paid being said
to be himself, or (as in Mat_20:28) his life; Τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν . It does not
follow that all conceptions of schools of theology as to how the atonement was efficacious for
its purpose are correct or adequate. It must, from the very nature of the SUBJECT , remain
to us a mystery. It may be enough for us to believe that whatever need the human conscience
has ever felt of atonement for sin, whatever human want was expressed by world^wide rites of
sacrifice, whatever especially was signified by the blood required for atonement in the Mosaic
ritual,—all this is met and fulfilled for us in Christ's offering of himself, and that in him and
through him we may now "come boldly to the throne of grace," having need of no
other Προέθετο in Mat_20:25 ("set forth," Authorized Version), may bear here its most usual
classical sense of exhibiting to view ("ante omniam oculos possuit," Bengel); i.e. in the
historical manifestation of the Redeemer. It may, however, mean "decreed," or "purposed''
(cf. Mat_1:13; Eph_1:9). The word ἱλαστήριονseems best taken as a neuter adjective used
substantively, there being no instance of its application in the masculine to a person. Its
ordinary use in the LXX (as also Heb_9:5) is to designate the lid of the ark (i.e. the mercy^

seat), the noun ἐπίθε#α (which is added Exo_25:17; Exo_37:6) being supposed to be always
understood, though the usual designation is simply τὸ ἱλαστήριον. Hence most commentators,
including the Greek Fathers generally, understood ἱλαστήριον in this sense here, Christ being
regarded as the antitype of the mercy^seat, as being the medium of atonement and approach to
God. The main objection to this view is that it involves an awkward confusion of metaphors, it
being difficult to regard him who was at once the Victim whose blood was offered, and the
High Priest who offered his own blood, at the mercy^seat, as being also the Mercy^seat itself.
(Thus, however, Theodoret explains: "The mercy^seat of old was itselfbloodless, being without
life, but it received the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrifice. But the Lord Christ and God is
at once Mercy^seat, High Priest, and Lamb.") The difficulty is avoided if we take the word
here in the sense of propitiatory offering, which in itself it will bear, a noun, such as θῦ#α ,
being supposed to be (cf. 4 Maccabees 17:22; Josephus, 'Ant.,' 16. c. 7; Dio Chrys., 'Orat.,'
11.1). Whatever its exact meaning, it evidently denotes a true fulfilment in Christ of the
atonement for sin undoubtedly signified by the type; as does further ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ αἵ#ατι ,
which follows. For a distinct enunciation of the significance of bleed under the ancient ritual,
as reserved for and expressing atonement, see especially Le Mat_17:11. The meaning of the
whole sacrificial ritual is there expressed as being that the life of man being forfeit to Divine
justice, blood, representing life, must be offered instead of his life for atonement. Hence, in
pursuance of this idea, the frequent references in the Hew Testament to Hebrews
physical blood^shedding of Christ (cf. Heb_9:22, "Without shedding of blood there is no
remission"). It is not, however, implied that the material blood of Christ, shed on the cross, in
itself cleanses the soul from sin, but only that it signifies to us the fulfilment in him of the type
of an atoning sacrifice. As to the construction of verse 25, it is a question whether ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ
αἵ#ατι is to be taken in connection with διὰ τῆς πίστεως , meaning "through faith in his
blood" (an unusual expression, though grammatically CORRECT , cf. Eph_1:15), or
with ἱλαστήριον . The emphatic position of αὐτοῦ , such as apparently to signify "in his own
blood," favours the latter connection (cf.Heb_9:12^25, where the offering of Christ is
distinguished from those of the Law in being διὰ τοῦ ἀδίου αἵ#ατος , not ἐν αἵ#ατι
ἀλλοτρίῳ ). Thus the meaning will be that he was set forth (or purposed) as
an ἱλαστήριον , AVAILABLE for us through faith, and consisting in the offering of himself
—in, the shedding of his own blood. For showing of his righteousness because of the passing
over of the sins done aforetime in the forbearance of God, in order to the showing of his
righteousness in the time that now is, so that he may be righteous, and justifying (the word
isδικαιοῦντα , corresponding with δικαιωσύνην and δίκαιων preceding) him that is of faith in
Jesus. This translation differs materially from that of the Authorized Version, which is
evidently erroneous, especially in the rendering of διὰ τὴν πάρεσιν by "for the remission."
Our translators, in a way very unusual with them, seem to have missed the drift of the
passage, and so been led to give the above untenable rendering in order to suit their view of it.
It is to be observed that two purposes of the setting forth (or purposing) of Christ Jesus
as ἱλαστήριον are here declared, both denoted by the word ἔνδειξιν , which is repeated, being
governed in the first clause of the sentence by εἰς , and in the second by πρὸς . Some say that
the preposition is changed with no intended difference of meaning. But it is not St. Paul's way
to use his prepositions carelessly. Εἰς in the first clause may be taken to denote the immediate
purpose of the propitiation, andπρὸς in the second to have its proper significance
of aim or direction, denoting a further intention and result, consequent on the first. The first
purpose, denoted by εἰς , was the vindication of God's righteousness with regard to the ages

past, in that he had so long passed over, or left unvisited, the sins of mankind. The propitiation
of Christ. at length set forth, showed that he had not been indifferent to these sins, though in
his forbearance he had passed them over. Cf. Act_17:30, Τοὺς #ὲν οὗν χρόνους τῆς ἀγνοίας
ὑπεριδὼν ὁ Θεὸς ; also Heb_9:15, where the death of Christ, as the Mediator of the new
covenant, is said to have been "for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the
first covenant," the meaning and efficacy of the "death" being thus regarded, in the first
place, as retrospective (cf. also Heb_9:26). But then there was a further grand purpose,
expressed by the πρὸς τὴν ἔνδειξιν of the second clause that of providing a way of present
justification for believers now, without derogation of the Divine righteousness. Such appears
to be the meaning of this passage.
CHARLES SIMEON, “
THE JUSTICE OF GOD IN JUSTIFYING SINNERS
Rom_3:24*26. Being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God
hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of
sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; to declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he
might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
THE whole plan of the Gospel takes for granted that we are in a lost and helpless condition. Its provisions
are suited to such, and to such only. Hence the Apostle proves at large that “we all have sinned and come
short of the glory of God;” and then he states, in the plainest and strongest manner, the method which God
has proposed for our restoration to his favour.
The words of the text will lead us to shew,
I. The way of a sinner’s justification before God—
The manner
of our justification is here plainly declared—
[There seems indeed a senseless tautology in the expressions of the text; but the words “freely,” and “by
grace,” are of very different import, and are necessary to convey the full meaning of the Apostle.
We are justified “freely,” that is, without any cause
for it in ourselves [Note: ä ù ñ å Ü í . See Joh_15:25. in
the Greek. And for the truth of the assertion, see Tit_3:5.]: no works before
our justification, no repentance or
reformation at the time
of our justification, no evangelical obedience after our justification, are at all taken
into the ACCOUNT
. There is no merit whatever in any thing we ever have done, or in any thing we ever
can do. Our justification is as independent of any merit in us, as was the gift of that Saviour through whom
we are justified.
Our justification also springs from no motive in
God, except his own boundless “grace” and mercy. When

speaking merely after the manner of men, we say, that God consults his own glory: but, strictly speaking, if
the whole human race were punished after the example of the fallen angels, he would be as happy and as
glorious as he is at present: just as the sun in the firmament would shine equally bright, if this globe that is
illuminated by it were annihilated. We can neither add to, nor detract from, God’s happiness or glory in the
smallest possible degree. His mercy to us therefore is mere grace, for grace sake.]
Yet it is of great importance to notice also the means
by which we are justified—
[Though our justification is a FREE GIFT
as it respects us, yet it was dearly purchased by our blessed
Lord, who “laid down his own life a ransom for us.” There was a necessity on the part of God, as the moral
Governor of the world, that his justice should be satisfied for our violations of his law. This was done through
the atoning blood of Jesus; on which account we are said to be “justified by his blood,” and to he “redeemed
to God by his blood.” The Father’s grace is the source from whence our justification flows; and “the
redemption that is in Christ” is the means, by which God is enabled to bestow it consistently with his own
honour.
In this view the text informs us, that “God hath set forth his Son to be a propitiation, or mercy*seat
[Note: ἱ
ë á ó ô Þ ñ é ï í . See Heb_9:5. the Greek.], through faith in his blood.” The mercy*seat was the
place where God visibly resided, and from whence he dispensed mercy to the people, as soon as ever the
blood of the sacrifices was sprinkled before him [Note: 2Co_5:19.].” But that typical mercy*seat is accessible
no more: Christ is now the true mercy*seat, where God resides, and from whence he dispenses all his
favours of grace and peace. God requires, however, that we should come with the blood of our Great
Sacrifice, and sprinkle it, as it were, before him, in token of our affiance in it, and as an acknowledgment,
that we hope for mercy only
through the blood of atonement.]
But in our contemplation of this SUBJECT
, we are more particularly called upon to shew,
II. The justice
of God as displayed in it—
God had exercised “forbearance” and forgiveness towards sinners for the space of four thousand years; and
was now, in the Apostle’s days, dispensing pardon to thousands and to myriads. That, in so doing, God
acted consistently with his own justice, the Apostle here labours
to establish: he repeats it no less
than thrice
in the short space of our text. We shall therefore shew distinctly, how the justice of God is
displayed,
1. In the appointment of Christ
to be our propitiation—
[If God had forgiven sins without any atonement, his justice, to say the least, would have lain concealed:
perhaps we may say, would have been greatly dishonoured. But when, in order to satisfy the demands of

justice, God sends, not an angel or archangel, but his only dear Son, and lays on him our iniquities, and
exacts of him
the utmost farthing of our debt, then indeed the justice of God is “declared,” yea, is exhibited in
the most awful colours. The condemnation of the fallen angels was indeed a terrible display of this attribute:
yet was it no proof of justice in comparison of that more conspicuous demonstration which was given of it in
the death of God’s co*equal, co*eternal Son.]
2. In requiring us to believe in him
as our propitiation—
[God wills that every one should come to “Christ” as a propitiation through faith in his blood, or, in other
words, should express his dependence on that blood that satisfied divine justice. As the offender under the
law, when he put his hand upon the head of his sacrifice, confessed his own desert of death; and as the
high*priest, when he sprinkled the blood of the sacrifices before the mercy*seat, confessed that the hope of
all Israel was derived from that blood [Note: Lev_16:2; Lev_16:14.]; so when we look to Christ as our
sacrifice, or approach him as our mercy*seat, we must carry, as it were, his blood with us, and sprinkle it on
our consciences before him, as an acknowledgment that by the justice of God we were deservedly
condemned, and that we have no hope of mercy except in such a way as will consist with the immutable
rights of justice. Thus it is not sufficient for Christ
to have honoured divine justice once by enduring its
penalties; butevery individual sinner
must also honour it for himself by an explicit acknowledgment, that its
demands must be satisfied.]
3. In pardoning sinners out of respect to
this propitiation—
[That sinners are justified through Christ, may well appear an act of transcendent mercy: but it is also an act
of justice;
and the justice of God is as much displayed in it, as it would be in consigning sinners over to
everlasting perdition. It is not an act of mercy, but of justice, to liberate a man whose debt has been
discharged by a surety. But when Christ has paid our debt, and we, in consequence of that PAYMENT
,
claim our discharge, we may expect it even on the footing of justice itself. And whereas it is found, that no
living creature ever applied to God in vain, when he pleaded Christ’s vicarious sacrifice, it is manifest, that
God has been jealous of his own honour, and has been as anxious to pay to us
what Christ has purchased
for us, as to exact of him
what he undertook to pay on our behalf: so that his justice is as conspicuous
in pardoniny us, as it has been in punishing him.]
Infer—
1. How certain is the salvation of believers!
[That which principally ALARMS
those who stand before a human tribunal, is an apprehension that justice
may declare against them. But there is no such cause for alarm on the part of a believer, seeing that justice
is no less on his side than mercy. Let all then look to Christ as their all*sufficient propitiation, and to God as

both “a just God and a Saviour.” Then shall they find “that God is faithful and just to forgive them their sins
[Note: 1Jn_1:9.],” yea, is “just in
justifying all that believe.”]
2. How awful will be the condemnation of unbelievers!
[While they slight the united overtures of mercy and justice, what do they but arm both these attributes
against them? Now, if they would seek for mercy, justice, instead of impeding, would aid, their suit. At the
last day, how will matters be reversed! When justice demands the execution of the law, mercy will have not
one word to say in arrest of judgment, but will rather increase the vengeance by its accusations and
complaints. Let this be duly considered by us, that we may ACTIVELY
glorify God as monuments of his
saving grace, and not passively glorify
him as objects of his righteous indignation.]
25 God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, [
9]
through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his
justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins
committed beforehand unpunished–
utW niIsαWhom God hath set forth - Margin, “Fore-ordained” (
προέθετο  proetheto). The
word properly means, “to place in public view;” to exhibit in a conspicuous situation, as goods
are exhibited or exposed for sale, or as premiums or rewards of victory were exhibited to public
view in the games of the Greeks. It sometimes has the meaning of decreeing, purposing, or
constituting, as in the margin (compare Rom_1:13; Eph_1:9); and many have supposed that this
is its meaning here. But the connection seems to require the usual signification of the word; and
it means that God has publicly exhibited Jesus Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of
people. This public exhibition was made by his being offered on the cross, in the face of angels
and of people. It was not concealed; it was done openly. He was put to open shame; and so put
to death as to attract toward the scene the eyes of angels, and of the inhabitants of all worlds.
To be a propitiation - ?λαστήριον  hilastērion. This word occurs but in one other place in the
New Testament. Heb_9:5, “and over it (the ark) the cherubim of glory shadowing the mercy-
seat. It is used here to denote the lid or cover of the ark of the covenant. It was made of gold, and
over it were the cherubim. In this sense it is often used by the Septuagint Exo_25:17, “And thou
shalt make a propitiatory ?λαστήριον  hilastērion of gold,” Exo. 18-20, 22; Exo_30:6; Exo_31:7;
Exo_35:11; Exo_37:6-9; Exo_40:18; Lev_16:2, Lev_16:13. The Hebrew name for this was תר?כ
kaphoreth, from the verb רפ?  kaaphar, “to cover” or “to conceal.” It was from this place that God
was represented as speaking to the children of Israel. Exo_25:22, “and I will speak to thee from

above the Hilasterion, the propitiatory, the mercy-seat. Lev_16:2, “For I will appear in the cloud
upon the mercy-seat.” This seat, or cover, was covered with the smoke of the incense, when the
high priest entered the most holy place, Lev_16:13.
And the blood of the bullock offered on the great day of atonement, was to be sprinkled “upon
the mercy-seat,” and “before the mercy-seat,” “seven times,” Lev_16:14-15. This sprinkling or
offering of blood was called making “an atonement for the holy place because of the uncleanness
of the children of Israel,” etc. Lev_16:16. It was from this mercy-seat that God pronounced
pardon, or expressed himself as reconciled to his people. The atonement was made, the blood
was sprinkled, and the reconciliation thus effected. The name was thus given to that cover of the
ark, because it was the place from which God declared himself reconciled to his people. Still the
inquiry is, why is this name given to Jesus Christ? In what sense is he declared to be a
propitiation? It is evident that it cannot be applied to him in any literal sense. Between the
golden cover of the ark of the covenant and the Lord Jesus, the analogy must be very slight, if
any such analogy can be perceived. We may observe, however,
(1) That the main idea, in regard to the cover of the ark called the mercy-seat, was that of
God’s being reconciled to his people; and that this is the main idea in regard to the Lord Jesus
whom “God hath set forth.”
(2) This reconciliation was effected then by the sprinkling of blood on the mercy-seat,
Lev_16:15-16. The same is true of the Lord Jesus - by blood.
(3) In the former case it was by the blood of atonement; the offering of the bullock on the
great day of atonement, that the reconciliation was effected, Lev_16:17-18. In the case of the
Lord Jesus it was also by blood; by the blood of atonement. But it was by his own blood. This the
apostle distinctly states in this verse.
(4) In the former case there was a sacrifice, or expiatory offering; and so it is in reconciliation
by the Lord Jesus. In the former, the mercy-seat was the visible, declared place where God
would express his reconciliation with his people. So in the latter, the offering of the Lord Jesus is
the manifest and open way by which God will be reconciled to people.
(5) In the former, there was joined the idea of a sacrifice for sin, Lev. 16. So in the latter. And
hence, the main idea of the apostle here is to convey the idea of a sacrifice for sin; or to set forth
the Lord Jesus as such a sacrifice. Hence, the word “propitiation” in the original may express the
idea of a propitiatory sacrifice, as well as the cover to the ark. The word is an adjective, and may
be joined to the noun sacrifice, as well as to denote the mercy-seat of the ark. This meaning
accords also with its classic meaning to denote a propitiatory offering, or an offering to produce
reconciliation. Christ is thus represented, not as a mercy-seat, which would be unintelligible; but
as the medium, the offering, the expiation, by which reconciliation is produced between God and
man.
Through faith - Or by means of faith. The offering will be of no avail without faith. The
offering has been made; but it will not be applied, except where there is faith. He has made an
offering which may be efficacious in putting away sin; but it produces no reconciliation, no
pardon, except where it is accepted by faith.
In his blood - Or in his death - his bloody death. Among the Jews, the blood was regarded as
the seat of life, or vitality. Lev_17:11, “the life of the flesh is in the blood.” Hence, they were
commanded not to eat blood. Gen_9:4, “but flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood
thereof, shall ye not eat.” Lev_19:26; Deu_12:23; 1Sa_14:34. This doctrine is contained
uniformly in the Sacred Scriptures. And it has been also the opinion of not a few celebrated
physiologists, as well in modern as in ancient times. The same was the opinion of the ancient
Parsees and Hindus. Homer thus often speaks of blood as the seat of life, as in the expression
AFPƒuPNFLW]R_RBFL 34m3cbmM4uW2c1w124u, or “purple death.” And Virgil speaks of “purple life,”

Purpuream vomit ille animam.
AEniad, ix. 349.
Empedocles and Critias among the Greek philosophers, also embraced this opinion. Among
the moderns, Harvey, to whom we are indebted for a knowledge of the circulation of the blood,
fully believed it. Hoffman and Huxham believed it Dr. John Hunter has fully adopted the belief,
and sustained it, as he supposed, by a great variety of considerations. See Good’s Book of
Nature, pp. 102, 108, New York edition, 1828. This was undoubtedly the doctrine of the
Hebrews; and hence, with them to shed the blood was a phrase signifying to kill; hence, the
efficacy of their sacrifices was supposed to consist in the blood, that is, in the life of the victim.
Hence, it was unlawful to eat it, as it were the life, the seat of vitality; the more immediate and
direct gift of God. When, therefore, the blood of Christ is spoken of in the New Testament, it
means the offering of his life as a sacrifice, or his death as an expiation. His life was given to
make atonement. See the word “blood” thus used in Rom_5:9; Eph_1:7; Col_1:14; Heb_9:12,
Heb_9:14; Heb_13:12; Rev_1:5; 1Pe_1:19; 1Jo_1:7. By faith in his death as a sacrifice for sin; by
believing that he took our sins; that he died in our place; by thus, in some sense, making his
offering ours; by approving it, loving it, embracing it, trusting it, our sins become pardoned, and
our souls made pure.
To declare - εvς?νδειξις …ngJ…af…nDng. For “the purpose” of showing, or exhibiting; to present
it to man. The meaning is, that the plan was adopted; the Saviour was given; he suffered and
died: and the scheme is proposed to people, for the purpose of making a full manifestation of his
plan, in contradistinction from all the plans of people.
His righteousness - His plan of justification. The method or scheme which he has adopted,
in distinction from that of man; and which he now exhibits, or proffers to sinners. There is great
variety in the explanation of the word here rendered “righteousness.” Some explain it as
meaning veracity; others as holiness; others as goodness; others as essential justice. Most
interpreters, perhaps, have explained it as referring to an attribute of God. But the whole
connection requires us to understand it here as in Rom_1:17, not of an attribute of God, but of
his “plan” of justifying sinners. He has adopted and proposed a plan by which people may
become just by faith in Jesus Christ, and not by their own works. His acquitting people from sin;
his regarding them and treating them as just, is set forth in the gospel by the offering of Jesus
Christ as a sacrifice on the cross. (For the true meaning of this phrase, see the note at Rom_1:17;
Rom_3:22.)
For the remission of sins - Margin, “Passing over.” The word used here πάρεσιν Gy?…gnaJ
occurs no where else in the New Testament, nor in the Septuagint. It means “passing by,” as not
noticing, and hence, forgiving. A similar idea occurs in 2Sa_24:10, and Mic_7:18. “Who is a God
like unto thee, that passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance?” In Romans
it means for the “pardoning,” or in order to pardon past transgression.
That are past - That have been committed; or that have existed before. This has been
commonly understood to refer to past generations, as affirming that sins under all dispensations
of the world are to be forgiven in this manner, through the sacrifice of Christ. And it has been
supposed that all who have been justified, have received pardon by the merits of the sacrifice of
Christ. This may be true; but there is no reason to think that this is the idea in this passage. For,
(1) The scope of the passage does not require it. The argument is not to show how people had
been justified, but how they might be. It is not to discuss an historical fact, but to state the way
in which sin was to be forgiven under the gospel.
(2) The language has no immediate or necessary reference to past generations. It evidently
refers to the past lives of the individuals who are justified, and not to the sins of former times.
All that the passage means, therefore, is, that the plan of pardon is such as completely to remove

all the former sins of the life, not of all former generations. If it referred to the sins of former
times, it would not be easy to avoid the doctrine of universal salvation.
(The design of the apostle is to showy the alone ground of a sinner’s justification. That ground
is “the righteousness of God.” To manifest this righteousness, Christ had been set forth in the
beginning of the gospel age as a propitiatory sacrifice. But though at this time manifested or
declared, it had in reality been the ground of justification all along. Believers in every past
dispensation, looking forward to the period of its revelation, had built their hopes on it, and
been admitted into glory.
The idea of manifestation in gospel times, seems most intimately connected with the fact that
in past ages, the ground of pardon had been hidden, or at best but dimly seen through type and
ceremony. There seems little doubt that these two things were associated in the apostle’s mind.
Though the ground of God’s procedure in remitting the sins of his people, during the former
economy, had long been concealed, it was now gloriously displayed before the eyes of the
universe. Paul has the very same idea in Heb_9:15, “And for this cause he is the Mediator of the
New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were
under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal
inheritance.” It may be noticed also that the expression in Heb_9:20, “at this time,” that is, in
the gospel age, requires us to understand the other clause, “sins that are past,” as pointing to sin
committed under former dispensations. Nor is there any fear of lending support to the doctrine
of universal salvation. if we espouse this view. the sins remitted in past ages being obviously
those of believers only. The very same objection might be urged against the parallel passage in
Heb_9:15.)
Through the forbearance of God - Through his patience, his long-suffering. That is, he
did not come forth in judgment when the sin was committed; he spared us, though deserving of
punishment; and now he comes forth completely to pardon those sins concerning which he has
so long and so graciously exercised forbearance. This expression obviously refers not to the
remission of sins, but to the fact that they were committed while he evinced such long-suffering;
compare Act_17:30. I do not know better how to show the practical value and bearing of this
important passage of Scripture, than by transcribing a part of the affecting experience of the
poet Cowper. It is well known that before his conversion he was oppressed by a long and
dreadful melancholy; that this was finally heightened to despair; and that he was then subjected
to the kind treatment of Dr. Cotton in Alban’s, as a melancholy case of derangement.
His leading thought was that he was doomed to inevitable destruction, and that there was no
hope. From this he was roused only by the kindness of his brother, and by the promises of the
gospel; (see Taylor’s Life of Cowper). The account of his conversion I shall now give in his own
words. “The happy period, which was to shake off my fetters, and afford me a clear discovery of
the free mercy of God in Christ Jesus, was now arrived. I flung myself into a chair near the
window, and seeing a Bible there, ventured once more to apply to it for comfort and instruction.
The first verse I saw was Rom_3:25; “Whom God hath set forth, etc.” Immediately I received
strength to believe, and the full beam of the Sun of righteousness shone upon me. I saw the
sufficiency of the atonement he had made for my pardon and justification. In a moment I
believed, and received the peace of the gospel. Unless, the Almighty arm had been under me, I
think I should have been overwhelmed with gratitude and joy. My eyes filled with tears, and my
voice choked with transport. I could only look up to heaven in silent fear, overwhelmed with love
and wonder. How glad should I now have been to have spent every moment in prayer and
thanksgiving. I lost no opportunity of repairing to a throne of grace; but flew to it with an
earnestness irresistible, and never to be satisfied.”

CLARKE, “Whom God hath set forth - Appointed and published to be a propitiation,
ιλαστηριον, the mercy-seat, or place of atonement; because the blood of the sacrifice was
sprinkled on and before that, in order to obtain remission of sin, punishment, etc. The mercy-
seat was the lid or cover of the ark of the covenant, where God was manifest in the symbol of his
presence, between the cherubim; therefore the atonement that was made in this place was
properly made to God himself. See the note on Luk_18:13.
Through faith in his blood - This shows what we are to understand both by the
απολυτρωσις, redemption, and the ιλαστηριον, propitiation; viz. that they refer to the sacrificial
death of Jesus Christ, as the atonement made, and the price paid down, for the redemption of
the souls of men.
To declare his righteousness - WkbRW;gWkikb, for the manifestation of his righteousness; his
mercy in saving sinners, by sending Jesus Christ to make an atonement for them; thereby
declaring his readiness to remit all past transgressions committed both by Jews and Gentiles,
during the time in which his merciful forbearance was exercised towards the world; and this
applies to all who hear the Gospel now: to them is freely offered remission of all past sins.
GILL, “Whom God had set forth to be a propitiation,.... Redemption by Christ is here
further explained, by his being "a propitiation": which word may design either Christ the
propitiator, the author of peace and reconciliation; or the propitiatory sacrifice, by which he is
so; and both in allusion to the mercy seat, which was a type of him as such. The apostle here
uses the same word, which the Septuagint often render
RC3Kg nvitRdtsG2RrtyvneR,28RyIwR`iD(aRvitR}tfR
Gy((rRDvR,2RvitRrydtRIydteRyIwRry2rRDvRfyrRyRr2d,a(eR0jbRkjW[R0'u ]W'uRgu;H]W[b "of the propitious
power of God" (b). Christ is the propitiation to God for sin; which must be understood of his
making satisfaction to divine justice, for the sins of his people; these were imputed to him, and
being found on him, the law and justice of God made demands on him for them; which he
answered to satisfaction, by his obedience and sacrifice; and which, as it could not be done by
any other, nor in any other way, is expressed by "reconciliation", and "atonement": whence God
may be said to be pacified, or made propitious; not but that he always loved his people, and
never hated them; nor is there, nor can there be any change in God, from hatred to love, any
more than from love to hatred: Christ has not, by his sacrifice and death, procured the love and
favour of God, but has removed the obstructions which lay in the way of love's appearing and
breaking forth; there was, a law broken, and justice provoked, which were to be attended to, and
Christ by his sacrifice has satisfied both; so that neither the wrath of God, nor any of the effects
of it, can fall upon the persons Christ is the propitiation for, even according to justice itself; so
that it is not love, but justice that is made propitious: for this is all owing to the grace and
goodness of God, who "hath set him forth", for this intent, in his eternal purposes and decrees;
in the promises of the Old Testament, in the types, shadows, and sacrifices of the old law; by the
exhibition of him in our nature, and in the ministration of the Gospel; and this is said to be
through faith in his blood. The "blood" of Christ is that, by which Christ is the propitiation;
for without the shedding of that blood, there is no redemption, no peace, no reconciliation, or
remission of sin; and "faith" in his blood is the means by which persons become partakers of the
benefits of his propitiation; such as peace, pardon, atonement, justification, and adoption: and
the end of Christ's being set forth as a propitiation, on the part of God's people, is,
for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God: by "sins that

are past", are meant, not sins before baptism, nor the sins of a man's life only, but the sins of Old
Testament saints, who lived before the incarnation of Christ, and the oblation of his sacrifice;
and though this is not to be restrained to them only, for Christ's blood was shed for the
remission of all his people's sins, past, present, and to come; yet the sins of the saints before the
coming of Christ, seem to be particularly designed; which shows the insufficiency of legal
sacrifices, sets forth the efficacy of Christ's blood and sacrifice, demonstrates him to be a perfect
Saviour, and gives us reason under the present dispensation to hope for pardon, since
reconciliation is completely made: "remission" of sin does not design that weakness which sin
has brought upon, and left in human nature, whereby it is so enfeebled, that it cannot help itself,
and therefore Christ was set forth, and sent forth, to be a propitiation; but rather God's passing
by, or overlooking sin, and not punishing for it, under the former dispensation; or else the
forgiveness of it now, and redemption from it by the blood of Christ, "through the forbearance of
God"; in deferring the execution of justice, till he sent his Son, and in expecting satisfaction of
his Son; which shows the grace and goodness of God to his people, and the trust and confidence
he put in his Son: the other end on the part of God, in setting forth Christ to be a propitiation,
was
to declare his righteousness Psa_22:31; meaning either the righteousness of Christ, which
was before hid, but now manifested; or rather the righteousness of God the Father, his
faithfulness in his promises relating to Christ, his grace and goodness in the mission of his Son,
the holiness and purity of his nature, and his vindictive justice, in avenging sin in his own Son,
as the surety of his people: the execution of this was threatened from the beginning; the types
and sacrifices of the old law prefigured it; the prophecies of the Old Testament express it; and
the sufferings and death of Christ openly declare it, since God spared not his own Son, but
sheathed the sword of justice in him.
'jsJtE <It is for the glory of his justice and righteousness (
Rom_3:25, Rom_3:26): Whom
God hath set forth to be a propitiation, etc. Note, [1.] Jesus Christ is the great propitiation, or
propitiatory sacrifice, typified by the
hilastērion, or mercy-seat, under the law. He is our throne
of grace, in and through whom atonement is made for sin, and our persons and performances
are accepted of God,
1Jo_2:2. He is all in all in our reconciliation, not only the maker, but the
matter of it - our priest, our sacrifice, our altar, our all. God was in Christ as in his mercy-seat,
reconciling the world unto himself. [2.] God hath set him forth to be so. God, the party offended,
makes the first overtures towards a reconciliation, appoints the days-man;
proetheto - fore-
ordained him to this, in the counsels of his love from eternity, appointed, anointed him to it,
qualified him for it, and has exhibited him to a guilty world as their propitiation. See
Mat_3:17,
and Mat_17:5. [3.] That by faith in his blood we become interested in this propitiation. Christ is
the propitiation; there is the healing plaster provided. Faith is the applying of this plaster to the
wounded soul. And this faith in the business of justification hath a special regard to the blood of
Christ, as that which made the atonement; for such was the divine appointment that without
blood there should be no remission, and no blood but his would do it effectually. Here may be an
allusion to the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrifices under the law, as Exo_24:8. Faith is the
bunch of hyssop, and the blood of Christ is the blood of sprinkling. [4.] That all who by faith are
interested in this propitiation have the remission of their sins that are past. It was for this that
Christ was set forth to be a propitiation, in order to remission, to which the reprieves of his
patience and forbearance were a very encouraging preface. Through the forbearance of God.
Divine patience has kept us out of hell, that we might have space to repent, and get to heaven.
Some refer the sins that are past to the sins of the Old Testament saints, which were pardoned

for the sake of the atonement which Christ in the fulness of time was to make, which looked
backward as well as forward. Past through the forbearance of God. It is owing to the divine
forbearance that we were not taken in the very act of sin. Several Greek copies make
…aJm`yaLdv`J
mLHJHv…LH
- through the forbearance of God, to begin
Rom_3:26, and they denote two precious
fruits of Christ's merit and God's grace: - Remission:
fnyJm`aJGy?…gna - for the remission; and
reprieves: the forbearance of God. It is owing to the master's goodness and the dresser's
mediation that barren trees are let alone in the vineyard; and in both God's righteousness is
declared, in that without a mediator and a propitiation he would not only not pardon, but not so
much as forbear, not spare a moment; it is owning to Christ that there is ever a sinner on this
side hell. [5.] That God does in all this declare his righteousness. This he insists upon with a
great deal of emphasis: To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness. It is repeated, as that
which has in it something surprising. He declares his righteousness, First, In the propitiation
itself. Never was there such a demonstration of the justice and holiness of God as there was in
the death of Christ. It appears that he hates sin, when nothing less than the blood of Christ
would satisfy for it. Finding sin, though but imputed, upon his own Son, he did not spare him,
because he had made himself sin for us,
2Co_5:21. The iniquities of us all being laid upon him,
though he was the Son of his love, yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him, Isa_53:10. Secondly, In
the pardon upon that propitiation; so it follows, by way of explication: That he might be just,
and the justifier of him that believeth. Mercy and truth are so met together, righteousness and
peace have so kissed each other, that it is now become not only an act of grace and mercy, but an
act of righteousness, in God, to pardon the sins of penitent believers, having accepted the
satisfaction that Christ by dying made to his justice for them. It would not comport with his
justice to demand the debt of the principal when the surety has paid it and he has accepted that
payment in full satisfaction. See 1Jo_1:9. He is just, that is, faithful to his word.
&אדnןםלbונWhom God hath set forth to be a propitiation — or “propitiatory sacrifice.”
through faith in his blood — Some of the best interpreters, observing that “faith upon” is
the usual phrase in Greek, not “faith in” Christ, would place a “comma” after “faith,” and
understand the words as if written thus: “to be a propitiation, in His blood, through faith.” But
“faith in Christ” is used in Gal_3:26 and Eph_1:15; and “faith in His blood” is the natural and
appropriate meaning here.
to declare his righteousness for the remission — rather, “pretermission” or “passing
by.”
of sins — “the sins.”
that are past — not the sins committed by the believer before he embraces Christ, but the
sins committed under the old economy, before Christ came to “put away sin by the sacrifice of
Himself.”
through the forbearance of God — God not remitting but only forbearing to punish
them, or passing them by, until an adequate atonement for them should be made. In thus not
imputing them, God was righteous, but He was not seen to be so; there was no “manifestation of
His righteousness” in doing so under the ancient economy. But now that God can “set forth”
Christ as a “propitiation for sin through faith in His blood,” the righteousness of His procedure
in passing by the sins of believers before, and in now remitting them, is “manifested,” declared,
brought fully out to the view of the whole world. (Our translators have unfortunately missed this
glorious truth, taking “the sins that are past” to mean the past sins of believers - committed
before faith - and rendering, by the word “remission,” what means only a “passing by”; thus
making it appear that “remission of sins” is “through the forbearance of God,” which it certainly
is not).

gtsFo 9v425.Whom God hath set forth, etc. The Greek verb, προτίθεναι, means sometimes to determine
beforehand, and sometimes to set forth. If the first meaning be taken, Paul refers to the gratuitous mercy of
God, in having appointed Christ as our Mediator, that he might appease the Father by the sacrifice of his
death: nor is it a small commendation of God’ grace that he, of his own good will, sought out a way by which
he might remove our curse. According to this view, the passage fully harmonizes with that in Joh_3:16,
“ so loved the world, that he gave his only*begotten Son.”
Yet if we embrace this meaning, it will remain still true, that God hath set him forth in due time, whom he had
appointed as a Mediator. There seems to be an allusion in the word
, ἱλαστήριον as I have said, to the
ancient propitiatory; for he teaches us that the same thing was really exhibited in Christ, which had been
previously typified. As, however, the other view cannot be disproved, should any prefer it, I shall not
undertake to decide the question. What Paul especially meant here is no doubt evident from his words; and
it was this, — that God, without having regard to Christ, is always angry with us, — and that we are
reconciled to him when we are accepted through his righteousness. God does not indeed hate in us his own
workmanship, that is, as we are formed men; but he hates our uncleanness, which has extinguished the light
of his image. When the washing of Christ cleanses this away, he then loves and embraces us as his own
pure workmanship.
A propitiatory through faith in his blood, etc. I prefer thus literally to retain the language of Paul; for it seems
indeed to me that he intended, by one single sentence, to declare that God is propitious to us as soon as we
have our trust resting on the blood of Christ; for by faith we come to the possession of this benefit. But by
mentioning blood only, he did not mean to exclude other things connected with redemption, but, on the
contrary, to include the whole under one word: and he mentioned “” because by it we are cleansed. Thus, by
taking a part for the whole, he points out the whole work of expiation. For, as he had said before, that God is
reconciled in Christ, so he now adds, that this reconciliation is obtained by faith, mentioning, at the same
time, what it is that faith ought mainly to regard in Christ — his blood.
For ( propter) the remission of sins,
(120) etc. The causal preposition imports as much as though he had
said, “ the sake of remission,” or, “ this end, that he might blot out sins.” And this definition or explanation
again CONFIRMS
what I have already often reminded you, — that men are pronounced just, not because
they are such in reality, but by imputation: for he only uses various modes of expression, that he might more
clearly declare, that in this righteousness there is no merit of ours; for if we obtain it by the remission of sins,
we conclude that it is not from ourselves; and further, since remission itself is an act of God’ bounty alone,
every merit falls to the ground.
It may, however, be asked, why he confines pardon to preceding sins? Though this passage is variously
explained, yet it seems to me probable that Paul had regard to the legal expiations, which were indeed
evidences of a future satisfaction, but could by no means pacify God. There is a similar passage
in Heb_9:15, where it is said, that by Christ a redemption was brought from sins, which remained under the
former Testament. You are not, however, to understand that no sins but those of former times were expiated
by the death of Christ — a delirious notion, which some fanatics have drawn from a distorted view of this
passage. For Paul teaches us only this, — that until the death of Christ there was no way of appeasing God,
and that this was not done or accomplished by the legal types: hence the reality was suspended until the
fullness of time came. We may further say, that those things which involve us daily in guilt must be regarded
in the same light; for there is but one true expiation for all.
Some, in order to avoid what seems inconsistent, have held that former sins are said to have been forgiven,
lest there should seem to he a liberty given to sin in future. It is indeed true that no pardon is offered but for
sins committed; not that the benefit of redemption fails or is lost, when we afterwards fall, as Novatus and
his sect dreamed, but that it is the character of the dispensation of the gospel, to set before him who will sin

the judgment and wrath of God, and before the sinner his mercy. But what I have already stated is the real
sense.
He adds, that this remission was through forbearance; and this I take simply to mean gentleness, which has
stayed the judgment of God, and suffered it not to burst forth to our ruin, until he had at length received us
into favor. But there seems to be here also an implied anticipation of what might be said; that no one might
object, and say that this favor had only of late appeared. Paul teaches us, that it was an evidence of
forbearance.
(120)
The words are , διὰ τὴν πάρεσιν They seem connected, not with the first clause, but with the one
immediately preceding; and
διὰ may be rendered herein; see a note on Rom_2:26; or more properly,
perhaps, on ACCOUNT
of. “ a proof of his own righteousness in passing by the sins,” etc.,
[Macknight ] ; “ order to declare his justification with respect to the remission of sins,” [Stuart ]
What is God’ “” here has been variously explained. Some regard it his righteousness in fulfilling his
promises, as [Beza ] ; others, his righteousness in Christ to believers, mentioned inRom_1:17, as
[Augustine ] ; and others, his righteousness as the God of rectitude and justice, as [Chrysostom ] Some, too,
as [Grotius ] view it as meaning goodness or mercy, regarding the word as having sometimes this sense.
It is the context that can help us to the right meaning. God exhibited his Son as a propitiation, to set forth this
righteousness; and this righteousness is connected with the remission of, or rather; as the word means, the
preterition of or connivance at sins committed under the old dispensation: and those sins were connived at
through the forbearance of God, he not executing the punishment they deserved; and the purpose is stated
to be, — that God might be or appear just, while he is the justifier of those who believe in Christ. Now, what
can this righteousness be but his ADMINISTRATIVE justice? As the law allowed no remission, and God
did remit sins, there appeared to be a stain on divine justice. The exhibition of Christ as an atonement is
what alone removes it. And there is a word in the former verse, as [Venema ] justly observes, which tends
to CONFIRM this view, and that word is redemption , ἀπολυτρώσις which is a deliverance obtained by a
ransom, or by a price, such as justice requires.
Both [Doddridge ] and [Scott ] regard the passage in this light; and the latter gives the following version of it,
—
“ God hath before appointed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, for a demonstration of his justice,
on ACCOUNT
of the passing by of sins, that had been committed in former times, through the
forbearance of God; I say, for a demonstration of his justice, in this present time, in order that he might be
just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.” — Nothing can be clearer than this version.
The last words are rightly rendered, though not literally
; τὸν ἐκ πίστεως Ιησου — “ of the faith of Jesus,” or, “
of faith in Jesus.” Him of faith is him who believes, as
τοῖς οὑκ ἐκ περιτο\ὢς — “ not of circumcision” means
“ who are not circumcised,” Rom_4:12; and
τοῖς έξ ἐριθείας — “ of contention,” signifies, “ who contend,” or,
are contentious, Rom_2:8. — Ed.

26 he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so

as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in
Jesus.
?tW ed5v,At this time - The time now since the Saviour has come, now is the time when he
manifests it.
That he might be just - This verse contains the substance of the gospel. The word “just”
here does not mean benevolent, or merciful, though it may sometimes have that meaning; see
the
Mat_1:19 note, also Joh_17:25 note. But it refers to the fact that God had retained the
integrity of his character as a moral governor; that he had shown a due regard to his Law, and to
the penalty of the Law by his plan of salvation. Should he forgive sinners without an atonement,
justice would be sacrificed and abandoned. The Law would cease to have any terrors for the
guilty, and its penalty would be a nullity. In the plan of salvation, therefore, he has shown a
regard to the Law by appointing his Son to be a substitute in the place of sinners; not to endure
its precise penalty, for his sufferings were not eternal, nor were they attended with remorse of
conscience, or by despair, which are the proper penalty of the Law; but he endured so much as
to accomplish the same ends as if those who shall be saved by him had been doomed to eternal
death.
That is, he showed that the Law could not be violated without introducing suffering; and that
it could not be broken with impunity. He showed that he had so great a regard for it, that he
would not pardon one sinner without an atonement. And thus he secured the proper honor to
his character as a lover of his Law, a hater of sin, and a just God. He has shown that if sinners do
not avail themselves of the offer of pardon by Jesus Christ, they must experience in their own
souls forever the pains which this substitute for sinners endured in behalf of people on the cross.
Thus, no principle of justice has been abandoned; no threatening has been modified; no claim of
his Law has been let down; no disposition has been evinced to do injustice to the universe by
suffering the guilty to escape. He is, in all this great Transaction, a just moral governor, as just to
his Law, to himself, to his Son, to the universe, when he pardons, as he is when he sends the
incorrigible sinner down to hell. A full compensation, an equivalent, has been provided by the
sufferings of the Saviour in the sinner’s stead, and the sinner may be pardoned.
And the justifier of him ... - Greek, “Even justifying him that believeth, etc.” This is the
uniqueness and the wonder of the gospel. Even while pardoning, and treating the ill-deserving
as if they were innocent, he can retain his pure and holy character. His treating the guilty with
favor does not show that be loves guilt and pollution, for he has expressed his abhorrence of it in
the atonement. His admitting them to friendship and heaven does not show that he approves
their past conduct and character, for he showed how much he hated even their sins by giving his
Son to a shameful death for them. When an executive pardons offenders, there is an
abandonment of the principles of justice and law. The sentence is set aside; the threatenings of
the law are departed from; and it is done without compensation. It is declared that in certain
cases the law may be violated, and its penalty “not” be inflicted. But not so with God. He shows
no less regard to his law in pardoning than in punishing. This is the grand, glorious, special
feature of the gospel plan of salvation.
Him which believeth in Jesus - Greek, “Him who is of the faith of Jesus;” in
contradistinction from him who is of the works of the Law; that is, who depends on his own
works for salvation.

CLARKE, “To declare, I say, at this time - To manifest now, by the dispensation of the
Gospel, his righteousness, his infinite mercy; and to manifest it in such a way, that he might still
appear to be the just God, and yet the justifier, the pardoner, of him who believeth in Jesus.
Here we learn that God designed to give the most evident displays both of his justice and mercy.
Of his justice, in requiring a sacrifice, and absolutely refusing to give salvation to a lost world in
any other way; and of his mercy, in providing The sacrifice which his justice required. Thus,
because Jesus was an atonement, a ransom price, for the sin of the world, therefore God can,
consistently with his justice, pardon every soul that believeth in Jesus. This is the full discovery
of God’s righteousness, of his wonderful method of magnifying his law and making it honorable;
of showing the infinite purity of his justice, and of saving a lost world.
Hitherto, from the ninth verse, the apostle had gone on without interruption, proving that
Jew and Gentile were in a state of guilt and condemnation, and that they could be saved only by
the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. The Jew, finding his boasted privileges all at stake,
interrupts him, and asks: -
GILL, “To declare, I say, at this time, his righteousness,.... This end is further
explained, it being to declare the righteousness of God "at this time", under the Gospel
dispensation; in which there was such a display of the grace, mercy, and goodness of God:
that he might be just; that is, appear to be so: God is naturally and essentially just in himself;
and he is evidentially so in all his works, particularly in redemption by Christ; and when and
while he is
the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus: Jesus, the Saviour, is the object of faith, as he
is the Lord our righteousness; the believer in Jesus is a real, and not a nominal one; God is the
justifier of such in a declarative way, and God only, though not to the exclusion of the Son and
Spirit; and which sentence of justification is pronounced by him on the foot of a perfect
righteousness, which neither law nor justice can find fault with, but entirely approve of; and so
he appears just and righteous, even though he justifies the sinner and the ungodly.
BiwahesE <To declare ... at this time — now for the first time, under the Gospel.
his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in
Jesus — Glorious paradox! “Just in punishing,” and “merciful in pardoning,” men can
understand; but “just in justifying the guilty,” startles them. But the propitiation through faith in
Christ’s blood resolves the paradox and harmonizes the discordant elements. For in that “God
hath made Him to be sin for us who knew no sin,” justice has full satisfaction; and in that “we
are made the righteousness of God in Him,” mercy has her heart’s delight!
Note,
(1). One way of a sinner’s justification is taught in the Old Testament and in the New alike:
only more dimly during the twilight of Revelation; in unclouded light under “its perfect day”
(
Rom_3:21).
(2). As there is no difference in the need, so is there none in the liberty to appropriate the
provided salvation. The best need to be saved by faith in Jesus Christ; and the worst only need
that. On this common ground all saved sinners meet here, and will stand for ever (Rom_3:22-
24).

(3). It is on the atoning blood of Christ, as the one propitiatory sacrifice which God hath set
forth to the eye of the guilty, that the faith of the convinced and trembling sinner fastens for
deliverance from wrath. Though he knows that he is “justified freely, by God’s grace,” it is only
because it is “through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” that he is able to find peace and
rest even in this (Rom_3:25).
(4). The strictly accurate view of believers under the Old Testament is not that of a company of
pardoned men, but of men whose sins, put up with and passed by in the meantime, awaited a
future expiation in the fullness of time (Rom_3:25, Rom_3:26; see on Luk_9:31; see on
Heb_9:15; see on Heb_11:39, Heb_11:40).
gtsFo 9v426.For a demonstration, (121) etc. The repetition of this clause is emphatical; and Paul
resignedly made it, as it was very needful; for nothing is more difficult than to persuade man that he ought to
disclaim all things as his own, and to ascribe them all to God. At the same time mention was intentionally
made twice of this demonstration, that the Jews might OPEN their eyes to behold it. — At this
time, etc. What had been ever at all times, he APPLIES to the time when Christ was revealed, and not
without reason; for what was formerly known in an obscure manner under shadows, God openly manifested
in his Son. So the coming of Christ was the time of his good pleasure, and the day of salvation. God had
indeed in all ages given some evidence of his righteousness; but it appeared far brighter when the sun of
righteousness shone. Noticed, then, ought to be the comparison between the Old and the New Testament;
for then only was revealed the righteousness of God when Christ appeared.
That he might be just, etc. This is a definition of that righteousness which he has declared was revealed
when Christ was given, and which, as he has taught us in the first chapter, is made known in the gospel: and
he affirms that it consists of two parts — The first is, that God is just, not indeed as one among many, but as
one who contains within himself all fullness of righteousness; for complete and full praise, such as is due, is
not otherwise given to him, but when he alone obtains the name and the honor of being just, while the whole
human race is condemned for injustice: and then the other part refers to the communication of
righteousness; for God by no means keeps his riches laid up in himself, but pours them forth upon men.
Then the righteousness of God shines in us, whenever he justifies us by faith in Christ; for in vain were
Christ given us for righteousness, unless there was the fruition of him by faith. It hence follows, that all were
unjust and lost in themselves, until a remedy from heaven was offered to them.
(122)
(121) There is a different preposition used here , πρὸς while εἰς is FOUND
in the preceding verse. The
meaning seems to be the same, for both prepositions are used to designate the design, end, or object of any
thing. This variety seems to have been usual with the Apostle; similar instances are found in Rom_3:22, as
to
εἰς and ἐπὶ and in Rom_3:30, as to ἐκ and διὰ “ both,” says [Wolfius
] “ final cause (causa finalis ) is
indicated.” [Beza ] renders them both by the same preposition, ad in Latin; and [Stuart ] regards the two as
equivalent. There is, perhaps, more REFINEMENT than truth in what [Pareus ] says, — that εἰς intimates
the proximate end — the forgiveness of sins; and
πρὸς the final end — the glory of God in the exhibition of
his justice as well as of his mercy. There is, at the same time, something in the passage which seems
favorable to this view. Two objects are stated at the end of the passage, — that God might appear just, and
be also the justifier of such as believe. The last may refer to
ἐις and the former to πρὸς and this is consistent
with the usual style of the Apostle; for, in imitation of the Prophets, where two things are mentioned in a
former clause, the order is reversed in the second. — Ed.
(122)
A parallel passage to this, including the two verses, Rom_3:25, is found in Heb_9:15; where a
reference, as here, is made to the effect of Christ’ death as to the saints under the Old testament. The same
truth is implied in other parts of Scripture, but not so expressly declared. [Stuart
] makes here an important
remark — that if the death of Christ be regarded only as that of a martyr or as an example of constancy, how
then could its efficacy be referred to “ that are past?” In no other way than as a vicarious death could it

possibly have any effect on past sins, not punished through God’ forbearance. — Ed.
iylWmnh Isαu,C.Gs::wgCdC,FsνOsdvCg;IsJ,s;vA,sM,vB,swith God. Conscience accuses no longer. Judgment now
decides for the sinner instead of against him. Memory looks back upon past sins, with deep sorrow for the sin,
but yet with no dread of any penalty to come; for Christ has paid the debt of His people to the last jot and
tittle, and received the divine receipt; and unless God can be so unjust as to demand double payment for one
debt, no soul for whom Jesus died as a substitute can ever be cast into hell. It seems to be one of the very
principles of our enlightened nature to believe that God is just; we feel that it must be so, and this gives us our
terror at first; but is it not marvellous that this very same belief that God is just, becomes afterwards the
pillar of our confidence and peace! If God be just, I, a sinner, alone and without a substitute, must be
punished; but Jesus stands in my stead and is punished for me; and now, if God be just, I, a sinner, standing
in Christ, can never be punished. God must change His nature before one soul, for whom Jesus was a
substitute, can ever by any possibility suffer the lash of the law. Therefore, Jesus having taken the place of the
believer.. having rendered a full equivalent to divine wrath for all that His people ought to have suffered as
the result of sin, the believer can shout with glorious triumph, "Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's
,S,Bgπρs pgsmpFIsdpjsε,s;vg;s::wgCdC,Fόs.pgsb;jCwgI for He hath died, "yea rather hath risen again." My hope
lives not because I am not a sinner, but because I am a sinner for whom Christ died; my trust is not that I am
holy, but that being unholy, He is my righteousness. My faith rests not upon what I am, or shall be, or feel, or
know, but in what Christ is, in what He has done, and in what He is now doing for me. On the lion of justice
the fair maid of hope rides like a queen.
27 Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what
MjC.BCMS,πsh.sg;vgspdspνw,jAC.Gsg;,sSvJπs pIsν:gsp. that of
faith.
utW niIsαWhere is boasting then? - Where is there ground or occasion of boasting or
pride? Since all have sinned, and since all have failed of being able to justify themselves by
obeying the Law, and since all are alike dependent on the mere mercy of God in Christ, all
ground of boasting is of course taken away. This refers particularly to the Jews, who were much
addicted to boasting of their special privileges; See the note at
Rom_3:1, etc.
By what law? - The word “law “here is used in the sense of “arrangement, rule, or economy.”
By what arrangement, or by the operation of what rule, is boasting excluded? “(Stuart).” See
Gal_3:21; Act_21:20.
Of works - The Law which commands works, and on which the Jews relied. If this were
complied with, and they were thereby justified, they would have had ground of self-confidence,
or boasting, as being justified by their own merits. But a plan which led to this, which ended in
boasting, and self-satisfaction, and pride, could not be true.
Nay - No.
The law of faith - The rule, or arrangement which proclaims that we have no merit; that we
are lost sinners; and that we are to be justified only by faith.

CLARKE, “What things soever the law saith - That the word law, here, does not mean the
pentateuch, is evident from the preceding quotations, not one of which is taken from that work.
Either the term law must here mean the Jewish writings in general, or that rule of moral
conduct which God had given to both Jews and Gentiles: to the former in their own Scriptures;
to the latter in that law written in their hearts by his own Spirit, and acknowledged in their
written codes, and in their pleadings in every civil case. Now, according to this great law, this
rule of moral conduct, whether given in a written revelation, as to the Jews, or by the secret
inspiration of his Spirit, as in certain cases to the Gentiles, every mouth must be stopped, and
the whole world, qHbR'R\'"]'b, both Jews and Gentiles, stand convicted before God: for all
mankind have sinned against this law.
GILL, “Now we know that what things soever the law saith,.... By "the law" is meant,
not the law of nature, nor the civil law of nations, nor the ceremonial law of the Jews, nor barely
the five books of Moses, nor the book of Psalms, of the Prophets, or the writings of the whole Old
Testament; but the moral law, as it appears in the whole word of God, which every man is bound
to observe, of which all are transgressors, by which is the knowledge of sin, which no man can be
justified by, and which Christ was made under, and came to fulfil. This law is represented as a
person speaking, and saying many things, some of which are here mentioned; so,
T3 CRT3YAeRnvitR
(yfRry2rnRraRyIwRraeRDrRyIR.r.y(RoisyrtRfDviR}tfDriRfsDvtsrR(y).R{itRotsraIrRDvRroty5rRvaeRystR
vitdRviyvRystR.IwtsRvitR(yfvitdRviyvRystR.IwtsRvitR(yfvitdRviyvRystR.IwtsRvitR(yfvitdRviyvRystR.IwtsRvitR(yf8RvitR}tfrRftstRDIRyRotG.(DysRrtIrtR.IwtsRDveRyrRDvRfyrRVD4tIRvaRvitdR,2RFartr8R
y((RdyI5DIwRystR.IwtsRDveRyrRvaRvitRdyvvtsRapRDv8Rvit2RystR.IwtsRa,(DVyvDaIRvaRa,twDtIGtRvaRDveRyIweRvisa.ViR
wDra,twDtIGteRGadtR.IwtsRDvrRrtIvtIGtRapRGaIwtdIyvDaI.R{itRt(tGvRapR6awRvitdrt(4trRftsteRyIwRystRDIR
radtRrtIrtR.IwtsRDv8RIavRDIwttwRyrRyRGa4tIyIvRapRfas5reRasRyrRDIRvitRiyIwrRapRFartreRIasRyrRyR2a5tRapR
,aIwyVt8RIasRystRvit2Ra,(DVtwRvaRrtt5RpasR–.rvDpDGyvDaIR,2RDveRyIwRystRtIvDst(2Rwt(D4tstwRpsadRvitRG.srtRyIwR
GaIwtdIyvDaIRapRDvR,2R—isDrv.R{it2RftstR.IwtsRDveRyIwRviyvRyrRyRGa4tIyIvRapRfas5reRyrRDIR’wydeRvitRptwtsy(R
itywRyIwRstostrtIvyvD4tRapRy((RdyI5DIw8RyIwRGydtR.IwtsRDvrRrtIvtIGtRapRGaIwtdIyvDaIRyIwRwtyvieRpasRiDrR
rDIeRyIwRvitDsRafIRyGv.y(RvsyIrVstrrDaIr8RfiDGiRDrRGaIrDrvtIvRfDviRvitRt4ts(yrvDIVR(a4tRapR6awRvaRvitdRDIR
—isDrveRvitRGa4tIyIvRapRVsyGtRdywtRfDviRvitdRDIRiDdeRyrRvitDsRitywRyIwRr.stv2eRyIwRvitDsR–.rvDpDGyvDaIR,2R
iDdURyIwRvit2RystRIafR.IwtsRDveRyrRDIRvitRiyIwrRapR—isDrv8RyIwR(aa5R.oaIRvitdrt(4trRyrRa,(DVtweR,2RvitR
(a4tRapR—isDrveRvaR2Dt(wRyRGittsp.(Ra,twDtIGtRvaRDvURitstRDvRdtyIrRr.GiRyrRystRvsyIrVstrrasrRapRvitR(yfeRyIwR
raR.IwtsRa,(DVyvDaIRvaRo.IDridtIveRfDvia.vRyI2RstVyswRvaR}tfRasR6tIvD(teRasRyI2RwDrvDIGvDaIR6awRiyrR
dywtRDIRiDrRafIR,styrvURyIwRvitRviDIVrRDvRry2rRvaRr.GiRysteRDvRGiysVtrRvitdRfDviRrDIeRyIwRGaI4DGvrRvitdRapRDveR
,aviRapRDvrRoa((.vDaIRyIwRV.D(vURraR
viyvRt4ts2Rda.viRdy2R,tRrvaootwviyvRt4ts2Rda.viRdy2R,tRrvaootwviyvRt4ts2Rda.viRdy2R,tRrvaootwviyvRt4ts2Rda.viRdy2R,tRrvaootw8RyIwRiy4tRIaviDIVRvaRry2RapRvitRo.sDv2RapRvitDsRIyv.steRfiDGiRyootysrRvaR

IgWjvWjOJὐίWjAOcrgJxWrvwWvMWACgcwWdvwςjWvMWwc(CAgvΤjrgjj,WdCcmCWOwgWjvWMgd,WOrJWjvWωgwίWcFpgwMgmATW"CgWὐOdW
FOςgjWjΤmCWOWwgpwgjgrAOAcvrWvMWACcr(jWAvWACgF,WACOAWACgcwWFvΤACjWOwgWjAvppgJWMwvFW(ὐvwίcr(WcrWACgFjgὐωgj,W
OrJWcrWACgcwWdvwςj,WdCcmCWOwgWMOwWMwvFWIgcr(WOJg∆ΤOAgWAvWACgWJgFOrJjWvMWACgWὐOdxWOrJWMwvFWmvFpὐOcrcr(W
O(OcrjAWACgWwc(CAgvΤjWRΤJ(FgrAWvMWέvJ,WjCvΤὐJWCgWpwvmggJWO(OcrjAWACgFWcrWACgWFvjAWwc(vwvΤjWFOrrgwlW
OrJWOὐὐWACgWdvwὐJWFOίWIgmvFgW(ΤcὐAίWIgMvwgWέvJOrJWOὐὐWACgWdvwὐJWFOίWIgmvFgW(ΤcὐAίWIgMvwgWέvJOrJWOὐὐWACgWdvwὐJWFOίWIgmvFgW(ΤcὐAίWIgMvwgWέvJOrJWOὐὐWACgWdvwὐJWFOίWIgmvFgW(ΤcὐAίWIgMvwgWέvJxWιgdjWOrJWέgrAcὐgjxWOὐὐWACgWcrJcωcJΤOὐjWvMWFOrςcrJWOwgW
(ΤcὐAίWIgMvwgWέvJ,WOrJWdcὐὐWIgWMvΤrJWAvWIgWjv,WjvvrgwWvwWὐOAgwlWjvFgWwgOJWcA,W.jΤIRgmAWAvWέvJ.,WOrJW
ΤrJgwjAOrJWcAWvMWOWjΤIRgmAcvrWAvWCcjW(wOmg,WIgcr(WIwvΤ(CAWAvWjggWACgcwWrggJWvMWcA,WOrJWvMWjOὐωOAcvrWIίWcAxWIΤAW
ACcjWcjWrvAWACgWmOjgWvMWOὐὐWACgWdvwὐJ,WwOACgwWυποδικος, signifies a subjection to that justice, vengeance,
and wrath of God, to which all men are liable in their own persons; since they are all found guilty
by the law, and will appear to be so, and therefore can never be justified by their obedience to it;
which is what the apostle is aiming at in all he here says, as appears from what follows; all which
"we know" to be true, and are fully assured of, who know the nature and spirituality of the law,
and to whom it has come with light and power.
Htarih IsαNow we know that what ... the law — that is, the Scriptures, considered as a
law of duty.
saith, it saith to them that are under the law — of course, therefore, to the Jews.
that every mouth — opened in self-justification.
may be stopped, and all the world may become — that is, be seen to be, and own itself.
guilty — and so condemned
before God.
bt?(r Isα27.Where then is glorying? The Apostle, after having, with reasons abundantly strong, cast
down men from their confidence in works, now triumphs over their folly: and this exulting conclusion was
necessary; for on this SUBJECT
, to teach us would not have been enough; it was necessary that the Holy
Spirit should loudly thunder, in order to lay prostrate our loftiness. But he says that glorying is beyond all
doubt excluded, for we cannot adduce anything of our own, which is worthy of being approved or
commended by God. If the material of glorying be merit, whether you name that of congruity or of condignity,
by which man would conciliate God, you see that both are here annihilated; for he treats not of the lessening
or the modifying of merit, but Paul leaves not a particle behind. Besides, since by faith glorying in works is so
taken away, that faith cannot be truly preached, without wholly depriving man of all praise by ascribing all to
God’ mercy — it follows, that we are assisted by no works in obtaining righteousness.
Of works? In what sense does the Apostle deny here, that our merits are excluded by the law, since he has
before proved that we are condemned by the law? For if the law delivers us over to death, what glorying can
we obtain from it? Does it not on the contrary deprive us of all glorying and cover us with shame? He then
indeed showed, that our sin is laid open by what the law declares, for the keeping of it is what we have all
neglected: but he means here, that were righteousness to be had by the law of works, our glorying would not
be excluded; but as it is by faith alone, there is nothing that we can claim for ourselves; for faith receives all
from God, and brings nothing except an humble confession of want.
This contrast between faith and works ought to be carefully noticed: works are here mentioned without any

limitation, even works UNIVERSALLY. Then he neither speaks of ceremonies only, nor specifically of any
external work, but includes all the merits of works which can possibly be imagined.
The name of law is here, with no strict correctness, given to faith: but this by no means obscures the
meaning of the Apostle; for what he understands is, that when we come to the rule of faith, the whole
glorying in works is laid prostrate; as though he said — “ righteousness of works is indeed commended by
the law, but that of faith has its own law, which leaves to works, whatever they may be, no
righteousness.”
(124)
(124) [Grotius
] explains “” here by “vivendi regula “ — rule of living;” [Beza ] by “doctrina — doctrine or
teaching,” ACCORDING to the import of the word הרות in Hebrew; and [Pareus ] takes “ law of works,”
metonymically, for works themselves, and “ law of faith,” for faith itself; and he QUOTES these words of
[Theophylact ] “ Apostle calls faith a law because the word, law, was in high VENERATION among the
Jews.” He uses the term, law, in a similar manner in Rom_8:2, “ law of the spirit of life,” etc. “ calls here the
gospel; ‘ law of faith,’ because faith is the condition of the gospel covenant, as perfect obedience was the
condition of the covenant of nature and of that of Moses, (conditio fœ naturalis et fœ Mosaici.)” — [Turrettin ]
PULPIT, “Where then is the boasting? (that of the Jew, referred to in Rom_2:1R29., of his superiority
to the Gentile with regard to justification). It is excluded. By what manner of ( ποίου ) law? Of works? Nay,
but by the law of faith. Is it, then, here implied that the law of works would allow of boasting? Not
so PRACTICALLY would leave room for it, on the supposition of its conditions being
fulfilled; it is a kind of law (observe ποίου νό:ου ;) which does not exclude it; for if a man could say, "I have
fulfilled all the righteousness of the Law," he would have something wherein to glory. But the principle of the
law of faith, which has been shown to be the only one available for the justification of either Jew or Gentile,
in itself excludes it. It will be observed that the strict sense of the word νό:ος , hitherto preserved, is
extended in νό:ος πίστεως . (For the various APPLICATIONS of which the word is capable, see
especially Rom_7:1R25.)
gktWsedvdoaeh 9v4 JUSTIFICATION WITHOUT BOASTING
Rom_3:27*28. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
IT may well be supposed, that any revelation, purporting to be from God, should, in addition to all external
evidences, have internal proofs also of its divine original. ACCORDINGLY, if God should reveal a way of
salvation to fallen creatures, we should of course expect it to be such a way., as should display the riches of
his own grace, and secure all the glory of it to himself. Now when we look into the Gospel, we find precisely
such a method of salvation revealed to us. And herein it differs from all the methods that ever have been
devised by man: for they
uniformly reserve a share of the glory, at least, to the creature: whereas the
Gospel
gives all the glory to God alone.
St. Paul, having opened throughout the whole preceding part of this epistle the state of fallen man, and the
way prescribed for his acceptance with God, puts this question, “Where is boasting then?” And having told
us, that it is, and must for ever be, “excluded by the law of faith,” he repeats his former conclusion, and
represents it as confirmed by this additional evidence of its truth; “Therefore
we conclude,” &c.

In discoursing on these words, we shall shew,
I. That the way of salvation (whatever it may be) must exclude boasting—
This will appear undeniably true, if we consider,
1. The avowed design of God in the revelation he has given us—
[St. Paul speaking on this subject, repeats even to tautology, that God designed from the beginning to exalt
his own grace, and had so planned the way of salvation, as that every part of it might redound to his own
honour [Note: Eph_1:5*7; Eph_1:9; Eph_1:11*12; Eph_1:14; Eph_2:4*5; Eph_2:7*9, especially ver. 7.]. All
possibility of glorying was studiously cut off from man. With this view the knowledge of this salvation was
imparted to the poor and ignorant in preference to the wise and noble [Note: 1Co_1:26*29.]; and every
person that embraced it was necessitated to seek every thing in and through Christ, that “the loftiness of
man might be laid low, and that God alone might be exalted [Note: 1Co_1:30*31. with Isa_2:17.].”]
2. The disposition and conduct of all that have ever embraced it—
[Abraham, the father of the faithful, ACCOUNTED himself only “dust and ashes [Note: Gen_18:27.]:” “nor
had he any thing whereof to glory before God [Note: Rom_4:2.].” Job, “a perfect and upright man, so that
none was like him upon earth,” yet spake with the utmost abhorrence of justifying himself before God
[Note: Job_9:2*3; Job_9:20*21; JOB_9:30*31; JOB_42:6.].David, “a man after God’s own heart,” cries,
“Enter not into judgment with thy servant, O Lord, for in thy sight shall no flesh living be justified
[Note: Psa_143:2.].” Isaiah, that most distinguished prophet, lamented that he was vile as a leper
[Note: Isa_6:5. with Lev_13:45.]; and confessed that his righteousnesses were as “filthy rags
[Note: Isa_64:6.].” St. Paul, who was “not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles,” yea, “laboured more
abundantly than they all,” acknowledges himself the very “chief of sinners [Note: 1Ti_1:15.],” desires to BE
FOUND in Christ, not having his own righteousness [Note: Php_3:8*9.], and boils with indignation at the
thought of glorying in any thing but the “cross of Christ [Note: Gal_6:14.].”
If any might glory in themselves, we might suppose that the glorified saints and angels would have liberty to
do so: but among them there is one only theme, “Worthy is the Lamb
[Note:Rev_5:11; Rev_5:13.].”
Now if the way of salvation (whatever it may be) correspond with God’s design in revealing it, or with the
dispositions of those who have been the most distinguished ornaments of it, then it must of necessity cut off
from man all occasion of glorying in himself. We may say therefore with the Apostle, “Where is boasting
then? It is excluded.”]
Having determined this point, let us proceed to inquire,

II. What is that way of salvation which alone does exclude boasting—
There are but two possible ways in which any man can be saved, namely, by works, or by faith. Many
indeed have attempted to unite them; but that
is impossible, seeing that they are distinct from, and directly
opposed to each other [Note: Rom_11:6.]. Let us then inquire which of the two excludes boasting?
1. Does the law of works?
[The law of works says, “Do this, and live.” Now suppose a man to be saved by his own obedience to this
law; will he not have to boast? May he not say to a perishing fellow*creature, “I made myself to differ from
you?” May he not justly take CREDIT
to himself for his own superior goodness? yea, even in heaven,
may he not unite his own praises with those of his Maker, and ascribe salvation partly to himself?
It is of no use to say, that our works are only in part
the ground of our acceptance; and that even for them we
are indebted to the operation of Divine grace: for, works are works, by whomsoever they are wrought in us;
and, as being wrought in and by us, they are our works; and in whatever degree they form the ground
of our
justification before God, in that degree (be it little or great) they give us a ground of glorying: and to
deny this, is to confound grace and works, which are as distinct, and as irreconcileable with each other, as
light and darkness [Note:Rom_11:6.].]
2. Does the law of faith?
[This says, “Believe and be saved.” By this law we are constrained to receive every thing out of the
Redeemer’s fulness, and to acknowledge him
as our “all in all.” Nothing is left for us to ascribe to
ourselves. The planning
of salvation was the work of God the Father: the procuring of it was the work of God
the Son: the imparting, CONTINUING
, and perfecting of it is the work of God the Holy Ghost. We cannot
glory over a fellow*sinner, and say, “God had respect to my good qualities, (either seen
or foreseen) and
on ACCOUNT
of them distinguished me from you:” no room is left but for shame to ourselves, and
gratitude to God.
Here then we may boldly say with the Apostle, “By what law is boasting excluded? of works? Nay: but by the
law of faith.”]
It remains then for us to inquire,
III. What conclusion we are to draw from these premises—
Nothing can be more express
than the conclusion drawn by the Apostle—

[We have seen that the way of salvation (whatever it be) excludes boasting; and that salvation by faith is the
only way that does exclude boasting: from hence therefore the conclusion is plain, that salvation must be by
faith and not by works.
But there is an emphasis in the Apostle’s words which deserves particular attention. He does not merely
affirm that salvation is by faith rather than by works, but by faith exclusive of works. No “deeds of the law”
are to be added to faith in order to render it effectual: we must be saved by faith simply, by faith solely. If any
work whatever be added to our faith as a joint ground of our hope, or as a motive to induce God to justify us,
or as a price whereby we are to obtain an interest in Christ, “faith will be made void, and the promise will be
of none effect [Note: Rom_4:14.].” We must not trust any more in our good works than in our vilest sins: for
the very instant that the smallest stress whatever is laid on our good works as procuring our justification
before God, boasting is introduced, and all hope of salvation is annihilated. Not even faith itself saves us as
a work, but solely as uniting us to Christ, by whose righteousness we are justified.]
Nor can any thing be more certain than the conclusion drawn by the Apostle—
[When men
argue, even from the clearest premises, we must be cautious in admitting their conclusions;
because they frequently put more into their conclusions than their premises will bear. Indeed, it is necessary
to watch every step of their arguments, because of the fallacies which often escape their own observation,
and would, if unguardedly acceded to, mislead our judgment also. But no suspicion need be entertained
respecting the point before us, since the premises are stated, and the conclusion is drawn, by God himself.
If we will dispute about the one or the other, we must debate the matter with God; for it is to God’s
arguments, and not to man’s, that our assent is now required.]
Before we conclude, we will consider some objections that may be urged against the foregoing statement. It
may be said that,
1. It contradicts many positive assertions of Holy Scripture—
[Our Lord does, in answer to the young man’s inquiry, “What shall I do
to inherit eternal life?” say, “If thou wilt
enter into life, keep the commandments [Note: Mat_19:16*17.].” But our Lord did not mean to say, that he, a
fallen creature, could
keep the commandments, so as to obtain eternal life by them: his answer was
intended to shew him, that he must not seek FOR LIFE
insuch a way: and, to convince him that he had
not kept the commandments so perfectly as he supposed, our Lord put him to the test; and gave him
thereby a very convincing proof, that he must seek salvation in another way, namely, by
becoming his
disciple, and embracing his salvation.
There are many other passages that speak of our works being rewarded: and it is true, that works done in

faith, will receive a reward of grace. But is there no difference between a sinner’sbeing justified by
the merit
of his works, and a justified person’s receiving a reward of grace on account of his works? In the
one case a man may boast, that he has, in part at least, purchased heaven: in the other case, he must
acknowledge his justification to be altogether of grace; and his increased weight of glory to be from the
superabounding riches of divine grace, proportioned to his services,
but NOT FOUNDED
on his merits.
But this matter is beyond a doubt: for we are told, that there could not
be a law given that should give life to
fallen man: and that that
was the very reason why a different way of salvation was prescribed to him
[Note: Gal_3:21*22.]. So that whatever is said in the Scriptures respecting the reward which God will give to
our works, we may be sure they never can be rewarded on the ground of merit, nor can we ever obtain life
by the performance of them.]
2. It encourages people to disregard good works—
[If this objection were founded in truth, we should think it sufficient to invalidate all that the Apostle himself
could say in confirmation of the text: for we may be well assured, that God can reveal nothing, that in its
consequences is destructive of morality. But why should it be thought injurious to good works, to affirm, that
they cannot justify us before God? Is there no other end for which they should be performed, than to
purchase heaven by them? Are they not necessary to prove the sincerity of our faith? Do they not honour
God, and benefit our fellow*creatures, and strengthen the religious principle within us, and tend to make
us meet
for heaven, yea, and (as has been observed above) increase our happiness in heaven? If we affirm
that food is of no use to clothe us, or that clothes are of no use to feed us, do we teach men to despise food
and clothing, merely because we deny their utility for purposes for which they never were designed? Surely
there are motives enough to the practice of good works, without urging one, which, if entertained in the
mind, would at once destroy all their value in the sight of God.
But let us see whether experience gives any countenance to this objection. Were Abraham, David, Paul,
regardless of good works, because they believed that they must be justified by faith without works? Were
those who are so justly celebrated for their faith in the eleventh chapter to the Hebrews, inattentive to good
works, when they chose the most cruel torments, and even death itself, in preference to an accusing
conscience? We may even appeal to you respecting those of our own day; who are they that are
condemned for their strictness and sanctity? they who exalt the merit
of good works, or those who maintain
justification by faith alone?
See then how little reason there is for this objection.]
In fine, we shall address a few words,
1. To those who are yet cleaving to the law of works—

[None but they who are taught of God, can conceive how prone we are to self*righteousness, or how subtle
are its workings in the heart. We may accede to every idea that has been suggested, and yet be secretly
founding our hopes on something that we have done, or that we intend to do; or, which is the same in effect,
seeking to recommend ourselves to Christ, that he may become our Saviour.
We entreat you, brethren, to he on your guard, lest, after all your good wishes and desires, you be proved to
have built upon a foundation of sand, and be left to inherit your own deserts.]
2. To those who embrace the law of faith—
[Much depends on your conduct: the eyes of the world are upon you; and they will be ready to spy out every
blemish in you, in order to justify their rejection of your sentiments. Others may commit a thousand sins, and
escape censure: but, if you
be guilty of any thing amiss, all mouths are open, not against you only, but
against your principles, and against all who maintain them. We say then, with the Apostle, “Let them that
have believed, be careful to maintain good works.” Be much on your guard, that you “give no occasion to the
enemies to speak reproachfully:” but rather endeavour to “put to silence the ignorance of foolish men by
well*doing.” Thus will you “adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour,” and give a practical refutation of the
calumnies that are circulated respecting you.]
BARCLAY, “THE END OF THE WAY OF HUMAN ACHIEVEMENT
Rom. 3:27*31
Where, then, is there any ground for boasting? It is completely shut out. Through what kind of law? Through
the law of works? No, but through the law of faith. So, then, we reckon that a man enters into a right
relationship with God by faith quite apart from works of the law. Or, is God the God of the Jews only? Is he
not the God of the Gentiles? Yes, he is the God of the Gentiles too. If, indeed, God is one, he is the God who
will bring those who are of the circumcision into a right relationship with himself by faith, and those who
never knew the circumcision through faith. Do we then through faith completely cancel out all law? God
forbid! Rather, we confirm the law.
Paul deals with three points here.
(i) If the way to God is the way of faith and of acceptance, then all boasting in human achievement is gone.
There was a certain kind of Judaism which kept a kind of profit and loss account with God. In the end a man
often came to a frame of mind in which he rather held that God was in his debt. Paul's position was that
every man is a sinner and God's debtor, that no man could ever put himself back into a right relationship
with God through his own efforts and that grounds for self*satisfaction and boasting in one's own
achievement no longer exist.
(ii) But, a Jew might answer, that might be well enough for a Gentile who never knew the law, but what about
Jews who do know it? Paul's answer was to turn them to the sentence which is the basis of the Jewish
creed, the sentence with which every synagogue service always began and still begins. "Hear, O Israel, the

Lord our God is one God" (Deut.6:4). There is not one God for the Gentiles and another for the Jews. God is
one. The way to him is the same for Gentile and Jew. It is not the way of human achievement; it is the way
of trusting and accepting faith.
(iii) But, says the Jew, does this mean an end of all law? We might have expected Paul to say, "Yes." In point
of fact he says, "No." He says that, in fact, it strengthens the law. He means this. Up to this time the Jew had
tried to be a good man and keep the commandments because he was afraid of God, and was terrified of the
punishment that breaches of the law would bring. That day has for ever gone. But what has taken its place is
the love of God Now a man must try to be good and keep God's law, not because he fears God's
punishment, but because he feels that he must strive to deserve that amazing love. He strives for goodness,
not because he is afraid of God, but because he loves him. He knows now that sin is not so much breaking
God's law as it is breaking God's heart, and, therefore, it is doubly terrible.
Take a human analogy. Many a man is tempted to do a wrong thing, and does not do it. It is not so much
that he fears the law. He would not greatly care if he were fined, or even imprisoned. What keeps him right is
the simple fact that he could not meet the sorrow that would be seen in the eyes of the one who loves him if
he made shipwreck of his life. It is not the law of fear but the law of love which keeps him right. It must be
that way with us and God. We are rid forever of the terror of God, but that is no reason for doing as we like.
We can never again do as we like for we are now for ever constrained to goodness by the law of love; and
that law is far stronger than ever the law of fear can be.
BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATOR, “Boastfulness—Jewish and Christian
I. Boastfulness was a Jewish national characteristic of a peculiar species, for it took the form of
religious conceit.
1. They could not boast of being rich or strong; but when their fortunes were at the lowest
they had one source of national pride left to them to buoy up their self-importance. In being
the selected favourites of heaven, they found a consolation so flattering, that they looked
down upon their conquerors as outcast aliens from God. Now, there was just sufficient
foundation for this pride to make it very excusable in them, although in the case of many it
took a shape which proved fatal to religious life.
2. Having reached the natural termination of his own argument, namely, that God, through
the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, is able to justify all who trust in Him, Paul suddenly halts, as
though he were looking for something that had vanished, and abruptly asks, “Where, then, is
the boasting of the Jews?” Answer—There is no more room left for it. But what shuts it out?
Not the law of works, which is understood to prescribe obedience as a means of reward; for if
a man earned reward, then, of course, he has some ground for boasting. No; boasting is
really excluded only under the new and better way of being just before God. That new
principle of acceptance with God cuts self-righteousness down to the roots as nothing else
does. That leaves him a debtor to sovereign grace alone.
II. This vicious boastfulness is not a thing essentially Jewish. At bottom, it is the child of human
pride. No man likes to own that he has literally not an inch of ground to stand on before the
judgment seat of God, nor a scruple’s weight of merit to plead there. There is nothing a man
dislikes more than that. However ragged our righteousness may be, or however filthy, we cannot
let it go to stand in utter shame, unscreened to the light, or defenceless before the judgment that
we have deserved. Can we not? Then there is no salvation for us. Salvation is for men who trust

in God’s way of finding mercy, and that principle shuts boasting out. Alone, naked, excuseless,
condemned, a sinner simply you must feel and confess yourself to be.
III. This self-justifying boastfulness feeds upon every point of advantage which is supposed to
lift one sinner a little above his fellow sinner. It lives by making invidious comparisons. There
are diversities among men in the degree of their moral depravity, and God’s providence gives to
some an immense advantage over others in respect of religious privilege. But when God singles
out one race from other races, or one class in society before another class, or one individual from
among others, for exceptional religious advantages, He certainly does not mean to puff up the
favoured one with spiritual conceit. It is nothing but the abnormal working of man’s own evil
nature that perverts what God thus meant for a blessing. Therefore we can afford to throw no
stones at ancient Israel. Do we Christians never boast of being far above the benighted Jew or
heathen? Your Israelite long ago conceived himself safe for eternity, because he had been duly
circumcised and observed the festivals. Does your Christian never build any hope of heaven
upon his good churchmanship or his unchallenged Christian profession? The Jews toiled hard to
deserve paradise by a great zeal for orthodoxy, and by leading a scrupulous life. Does no one
ever hear of any Christian doing the like? For you, as well as the Jew, it is fatally easy to miss the
humble road that leads to life through a lowly trust in Christ. For you, too, it is perilously easy to
build your religious confidence upon a righteousness of your own.
IV. Against this assumption see what mighty engines Paul brings to bear.
1. The argument is one to this effect.
“If I am wrong in saying that every man is to be justified apart from the law—and if you are right
in thinking that the observance of Mosaic rites is the ground of your acceptance, then in that
case God is only the God of the Jews, since it is only to Jews that He has given this Mosaic law.
But is not this dead against the very prime point of your confession as against polytheism, that
there is one living true God of all men alike? The foundation of this reasoning lies in
monotheism, the doctrine of the unity of God, and His Common relation to all. The cleft which
cuts the human race into Jews and Gentiles cuts far down; but it cannot cut so far as the
fundamental question of the sinner’s acceptance with his Maker. How shall man have peace with
God? is a problem which can only have one answer—not two. The same one God, just and
merciful to all His children, must justly justify every sinner in the same way.
2. But the levelling argument of the apostle is good for more than Jews. Just look at our own
position in the light of this argument. We are privileged men—as Christians, as Englishmen,
as the children of devout parents who saw to our being early baptized in the faith and
nurture of the saints. Shall we then rest with boastful confidence in this, and deem that the
gate of life is less straight for us than for idolaters or outcasts? Is not that to repeat the
blunder of the Jew, to postulate, as it were, a two-faced God?—one God who apportions to
ignorant and wicked people their own share of grace, as a thing that they have no claim on,
out of pure regard to the work of Jesus Christ, but who receives respectable Christian people
on another and easier footing altogether. I have no fear that any of you will say such things.
But what I fear is that some of you may gradually harbour a self-righteous confidence in your
position and character, which would substantially mean the same thing. Against such a self-
confident temper, therefore, I fight with the weapon of St. Paul. God has not two ways of
saving men. (J. Oswald Dykes, D. D.)
Boasting excluded
1. The term “law” may mean more than an authoritative rule; it may signify the method of
succession by which one event follows another; and it is thus that we speak of a law of

nature, or of mind. Both the law of works and the law of faith may be understood here in this
latter sense. The one is that by which a man’s justification follows upon his having
performed the works; the other is that by which a man’s justification follows upon his faith—
just as the law of gravitation is that upon which everybody above the surface of the earth,
when its support is taken away, will fall toward its centre.
2. Now the aim of the apostle is to prove that by the law of works none is justified, and I
want you to notice how those who dislike the utter excluding of works endeavour to evade
this.
I. They hold that the affirmation of Paul is of the ceremonial and not of the moral law. They are
willing enough to discard obedience to the former, but not to the latter. All rites, be they Jewish
or Christian, have a greatly inferior place in their estimation to the virtues of social life, or to the
affections of an inward and enlightened piety in a man, even though a stranger to the puritanical
rigours of the Sabbath and of the sacrament.
1. We are far from disputing the justness of their preference; but we would direct them to the
use that they should make of it when applying to it the statement that from justification all
boasting is excluded. Does not the statement point the more to that of which men are
inclined to boast the more? To set aside the law of works is not to exclude boasting, if only
those works are set aside which beget no reverence when done by others, and no
complacency when done by themselves. The exclusion of boasting might appear to an old
Pharisee as that which swept away the whole ceremonial in which he gloried. But for the
same reason should it appear to the tasteful admirer of virtue to sweep away the moral
accomplishments in which he glories. In a word, this verse has the same force now that it
had then. It then reduced the boastful Jew to the same ground of nothingness before God
with the Gentile whom he despised. And it now reduces the boastful moralist to the same
ground with the slave of rites, whom he so thoroughly despises.
2. But that Paul means the moral law is plain, because in the theft and adultery and sacrilege
of chap. 2, and in the impiety and deceit and slander and cruelty of chap. 3, we see that it
was the offence of a guilty world against it which the apostle chiefly had in his eye; and when
he says that by the law is the knowledge of sin, how could he mean the ceremonial law, when
they were moral sins that he had all along been specifying?
3. This distinction between the moral and ceremonial is, in fact, a mere device for warding
off a doctrine by which alienated nature feels herself to be humbled. It is an opiate by which
she would fain regale the lingering sense that she so fondly retains of her own sufficiency. It
is laying hold of a twig by which she may bear herself up, in her own favourite attitude of
independence of God. But this is a propensity to which the apostle grants no quarter
whenever it appears; and never will your mind and his be at one till reduced to a sense of
your own nothingness, and leaning your whole weight on the sufficiency of another, you
receive justification as wholly of grace, and feel on this ground that every plea of boasting is
overthrown.
II. They at times allow justification to be of faith wholly, but make a virtue of faith. All the
glorifying to the law associated with obedience they would now transfer to acquiescence in the
gospel. The docility, attention, love of truth, and preference of light to darkness confer a merit
upon believing; and here would they make a last and a desperate stand for the credit of a share
in their own salvation.
1. Now if this verse be true, there must be an error in this also. It eaves the sinner nothing to
boast of at all; and should he continue to associate any glorying with his faith, then is he
turning this faith to a purpose directly the reverse of that which the apostle intends by it.
There is no glory, you will allow, in seeing the sun with your eyes open, whatever glory may

accrue to Him who arrayed this luminary in his brightness and endowed you with that
wondrous mechanism which conveys the perception of it. And be assured that in every way
there is just as little to boast of on the part of him who sees the truth of the gospel, or who
relies on its promises after he perceives them to be true. His faith, which has been aptly
termed the hand of the mind, may apprehend the offered gift and may appropriate it; but
there is just as little of moral praise to be rendered on that account, as to the beggar for
laying hold of the offered alms.
2. And to cut away all pretensions to glorying, the faith itself is a gift. The gospel is like an
offer made to one who has a withered hand; and power must go forth with the offer ere the
hand can be extended to take hold of it. It is not enough for God to present an object, He
must also awaken the eye to the perception of it. (T. Chalmers, D. D.)
Grace exalted—boasting excluded
Pride is most obnoxious to God. As a sin, His holiness hates it; as a treason, His sovereignty
detests it, and the whole of His attributes stand leagued to put it down. The first transgression
had in its essence pride. The ambitious heart of Eve desired to be as God, and Adam followed;
and we know the rest. Remember Babel, Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib, and Herod.
God loves His servants, but pride even in them He abhors. Think of David and Hezekiah. And
God has uttered the most solemn words as well as issued the most awful judgment against pride.
But to put an everlasting stigma upon it He has ordained that the only way in which He will save
men shall be a way by which man’s pride shall be humbled in the dust. Note here—
I. The rejected plan. There are two ways by which a man might have been forever blessed. The
one was by works—“This do and thou shalt live; be obedient and receive the reward”; the other
plan was—“Receive grace and blessedness as the free gift of God.”
1. Now God has not chosen the system of works, because it is impossible for us.
(1) For the law requires of us—
(2) Perfect obedience. One single flaw, one offence, and the law condemns without
mercy. And if it were possible to keep the law in its perfection outwardly, it is required to
keep it in the heart as well.
(3) Because if up to this moment your heart and life have been altogether without
offence, yet it is required that it should be so even to your dying day. But think of the
temptations to which you will be subject!
(4) Remember, too, that we are not sure that even this life would end that probation, for
long as thou shouldst live duty would still be due, and the law still thine insatiable
creditor. Now in the face of all this, will any of you prefer to be saved by your works? Or,
rather, will you prefer to be damned by your works? for that will certainly be the issue,
let you hope what you may.
2. Now I suppose that very few indulge a hope of being saved by the law in itself; but there is
a delusion abroad that perhaps God will modify the law.
(1) That He will accept a sincere obedience even if it be imperfect. Now against this Paul
declares, “By the works of the law shall no flesh living be justified,” so that that is
answered at once. But more than this, God’s law cannot alter, it can never be content to
take less than it demands. God, therefore, cannot accept anything but a perfect
obedience.

(2) But some say, “could it not be partly by grace and partly by works?” No. The apostle
says that boasting is excluded; but if we let in the law of works, then man has an
opportunity for self-gratification as having saved himself.
(3) “Well,” says another, “I don’t expect to be saved by my morality; but then, I have
been baptized; I receive the Lord’s Supper; I go to church.” These ordinances are blessed
means of grace to saved souls; but to the unsaved they can have no avail for good, but
may increase their sin, because they touch unworthily the holy things of God.
(4) Others suppose that at least their feelings, which are only their works in another
shape, may help to save them; but if you rely upon what you feel, you shall as certainly
perish as if you trust to what you do.
(5) There are others who rely upon their knowledge. They have a sound creed, and hold
the theory of justification by faith and exult over their fellow professors because they
hold the truth. Now this is nothing but salvation by works, only they are works
performed by the head instead of by the hand.
II. Boasting is excluded—God has accepted the second plan, namely, the way of salvation by
faith through grace. The first man that entered heaven entered by faith. “By faith Abel,” etc. Over
the tombs of all the godly who were accepted of God you may read the epitaph—“These all died
by faith.” By faith they received the promise; and among all yonder bright and shining throng,
there is not one who does not confess, “We have washed our robes and made them white in the
blood of the Lamb.” As Calvin says, “Not a particle of boasting can be admitted, because not a
particle of work is admitted into the covenant of grace”; it is not of man nor by man, not of him
that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy, and, therefore, boasting is
excluded by the law of faith.
III. Have no merits of their own. The very gate which shuts out boasting shuts in hope for the
worst of sinners. You say, “I never attend the house of God, and up to this time I have been a
thief and a drunkard.” Well, you stand today on the same level as the most moral sinner and the
most honest unbeliever in the matter of salvation. They are lost, since they believe not, and so
are you. When we come to God the best can bring nothing, and the worst can bring no less. I
know some will say, “Then what is the good of morality?” I will tell you. Two men are overboard
there; one man has a dirty face, and the other a clean one. There is a rope thrown over from the
stern of the vessel, and only that rope will save the sinking men, whether their faces be fair or
foul. Do I therefore underrate cleanliness. Certainly not; but it will not save a drowning man,
nor will morality save a dying man. Or take this case. Here we have two persons, each with a
deadly cancer. One of them is rich and clothed in purple, the other is poor and wrapped about
with a few rags; and I say to them, “You are both on a par now, here comes the physician, his
touch can heal you both; there is no difference between you whatever.” Do I therefore say that
the one man’s robes are not better than the other’s rags? Of course they are better in some
respects, but they have nothing to do with the matter of curing disease. So morality is a neat
cover for foul venom, but it does not alter the fact that the heart is vile and the man himself
under condemnation. Suppose I were an army surgeon. There is one man there—he is a captain,
and a brave man—and he is bleeding out his life from a terrible gash. By his side there lies a
private, and a great coward too, wounded in the same way. I say to them, “You are both in the
same condition, and I can heal you both.” But if the captain should say, “I do not want you; I am
a captain, go and see to that poor dog yonder.” Would his courage and rank save his life? No;
they are good things, but not saving things. So it is with good works.
IV. The same plan which shuts out boasting leads us to a gracious gratitude to Christ. (C. H.
Spurgeon.)

By what law?…the law of faith.
Boasting excluded by the law of faith
I. Faith a law.
1. As God’s appointed way of acceptance.
2. As an economy according to which God deals with men.
3. As a binding rule to which we owe subjection.
4. As having justification connected with it as a sure result.
II. This law excludes boasting.
1. From the nature of faith. Faith simply trusts, accepts a proffered gift. There can be no
boasting in believing that God speaks the truth; nor in a helpless sinner leaning on
omnipotence; nor in a beggar receiving alms. Faith looks entirely away from itself to
another, viz., Christ. Eyes only Christ’s righteousness, not its own; comes empty-handed and
receives out of Christ’s fulness (Joh_1:16); is the window through which the light passes, not
the light; glories in Christ’s obedience, but not in its own. Therefore faith is a humble,
depending, self-renouncing grace.
2. From God’s procedure in justifying by it. All are regarded on the same footing as guilty
sinners, for men are justified as ungodly (Rom_4:5), the greatest sinner as freely and fully as
the least (1Ti_1:15). Crimson, double-dyed sins are no hindrance to acceptance (Isa_1:18;
1Co_6:9-11); nor nature’s highest attainments a furtherance of it (Mar_10:17-22). All equally
need salvation and all are welcome to it. The one ground of acceptance for all is Christ’s
righteousness, for the wedding garment was for the poorest as well as for the richest
(Mat_22:11-12).
3. From the origin of faith itself. Faith to receive is Christ’s gift (Heb_12:2; Eph_2:8;
Php_1:20). The withered hand restored to accept the proffered bounty. (J. Robinson, D. D.)
Romans 3:29-31
Is He the God of the Jews only?
The Divine unities
I. One God.
II. One law.
III. One faith.
IV. One ultimate purpose. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Is He not also of the Gentiles?—
The universal Father
The writings of Paul have met with a singular fate. They were intended to reveal the Father’s
universal and impartial love; they have been used to represent Him as an exclusive and arbitrary

Sovereign. They were designed to open the kingdom of God to all men; and they have been so
distorted as to shut it on the many and confine it to the few. The great design of Paul was to
vindicate the spiritual right of the race against the exclusive bigotry of the Jews; to manifest God
as the Father of all men, and Christ as the Saviour, not of one narrow nation, but the whole
world. Note, then, from the text—
I. The doctrine that God is “the God of the Gentiles.” To understand the fall import of this, we
must consider that to the Jew the Gentiles were odious. He thought it pollution to eat with them.
He called them dogs. He claimed God as exclusively his God. Could we fully comprehend this,
we should be filled with admiration for the moral grandeur manifested in the text. Paul, in
writing them, not only offered violence to all his earliest and deepest impressions, but put his
life in peril.
1. God is “the God of the Gentiles,” and do we not respond to this truth? The heathen had
indeed wandered far from God; and to the Jews He seemed to have forsaken them utterly.
But how could the universal Father forsake the millions of His creatures? Judaea was but a
speck on the globe. Was the Infinite One to be confined to this? Could His love be stinted to
the few to whom He had specially revealed His will? In the very darkest ages God was “the
God of the Gentiles.” They had their revelation. Light from heaven descended into their
souls. They had the Divine law “written in their hearts.” God keep us from the horrible
thought that the myriads who are buried in heathen darkness are outcasts from His level
Their spiritual wants should indeed move our compassion; and the higher light is given us
that we may send it to these brethren.
2. That God is “the God of the Gentiles,” we learn from the wonderful progress which human
nature made in heathen ages. Remember Greece. God’s gift of genius—one form of
inspiration—was showered down on that small territory as on no other region under heaven.
To Greece was given the revelation of beauty, which has made her literature and art, next to
the Holy Scriptures, the most precious legacy of past ages. In that wonderful country amidst
degrading vices were manifested sublimest virtues. Undoubtedly Grecian philosophy was an
imperfect intellectual guide, and impotent as a moral teacher. But was not God the God of
the Gentiles when He awakened in the Greeks such noble faculties of reason, and by their
patriotic heroism carried so far forward the education of the human race?
3. God is “the God of the Gentiles”; and He was so just when He separated from them His
chosen people. For why was the Jew set apart? That “all families of the earth might be
blessed.” Judaism was a normal school to train up teachers for the whole world. The Hebrew
prophet was inspired to announce an age when the knowledge of God was to cover the earth
as waters cover the sea. Nothing in the history of the Jews shows them to us as God’s
personal favourites, for their history is a record of Divine rebukes, threatenings, and
punishments. Their very privileges brought upon them peculiar woes. In ages of universal
idolatry they were called to hold forth the light of pure Theism. They betrayed their trust,
and when the time came for the “partition wall” to be prostrated, and for the Jews to receive
the Gentile world into brotherhood, they shrank from their glorious task; and rejecting
mankind, they became themselves the rejected of God. Meanwhile, faith in the one true God
has been spread throughout the Gentile world. Thus we see that, in the very act of selecting
the Jew, the universal Father was proving Himself to be the God of the heathen, even when
He seemed to reject them.
4. This doctrine is one which we Christians still need to learn. For we are too apt, like the
Jew, to exalt ourselves above our less favoured brethren. It is the doctrine of the mass of
Christians even now that the heathen are the objects of God’s wrath. But how can a sane man
credit for an instant that the vastly greater portion of the human race is abandoned by God?
But Christianity nowhere teaches this horrible faith. And, still more, no man in his heart

does or can believe such an appalling doctrine.
II. The universal principle contained in this doctrine. The language of the text contains an
immutable truth for all ages, viz., that God loves equally all human beings; that the Father has
no favourites; that in His very being He is impartial and universal Love.
1. This grand truth is taught in nature. God’s works are of the same authority with His Word.
The universe teaches that God is the God of all, and not of the few. God governs by general
laws, which bear alike on all beings, and are plainly instituted for the good of all. We are
placed under one equitable system, which is administered with inflexible impartiality. This
sun, does he not send as glad a ray into the hovel as into the palace? Does the rain fall upon a
few favoured fields? or does the sap refuse to circulate except through the flowers and trees
of a certain tribe? Nature is impartial in her smiles. She is impartial also in her frowns. Who
can escape her tempests, earthquakes, raging waves? Young and old, the good and evil, are
wrapped in the same destroying flame, or plunged in the same overwhelming sea.
Providence has no favourites. Pain, disease, and death break through the barriers of the
strong and rich, as well as of the humble and the poor.
2. In religion the universal Father is revealed as working in the human soul, and as
imparting to man His own Spirit. God’s Spirit knows no bounds. There is no soul to which
He does not speak, no human abode into which He does not enter with His best gifts. From
the huts of the poor, from the very haunts of vice, from the stir of very active business, as
well as from the stillness of retired life, have come forth the men who, replenished with
spiritual gifts, have been the guides, comforters, lights, regenerators of the world.
III. This principle as applied to ourselves.
1. Is God the Father of the rich only? Is He not also the Father of the poor? The prosperous
are prone to feel as if they are a different race from the destitute. But to the Possessor of
heaven and earth, how petty must be the highest magnificence and affluence! Does the
Infinite Spirit select as His special abode the palace and fly from the hut? On the contrary, if
God has a chosen spot on earth, is it not the humble dwelling of patient, unrepining, trustful,
virtuous poverty? From the dwellings of the downcast, from the stern discipline of narrow
circumstances, how many of earth’s noblest spirits have grown up! May we not still learn a
lesson of Divine wisdom from the manger at Bethlehem?
2. Is God the God of the good only, or, is He not also the God of the wicked? God indeed
looks, we may believe, with peculiar approval on the good. But He does not desire spiritual
perfection and eternal happiness for them more than He does for the most depraved. The
Scriptures even seem to represent God as peculiarly interested in the evil. “There is joy in
heaven over,” etc. The good do not and ought not to absorb God’s love. We in our conceited
purity may withdraw from them, may think it pollution to touch them, may say, “Stand off.”
But God says to His outcast child, “Come near.” Do I speak to those who have escaped gross
vice? Bless God for your happiness, but set up no insuperable barrier between yourself and
the fallen. In conclusion, let us ask ourselves, What was the guilt of the Jews against which
the apostle protested? What was it that scattered their nation like chaff throughout the
earth? Their proud separation of themselves from their race. And will not the same spirit
bring the same ruin upon us? Separation of ourselves from our race is spiritual death. It is
like cutting off a member from the body; the severed limb must perish. This spirit of
universal humanity is the very soul of our religion. As yet its heavenly power is scarcely felt.
Therefore it is that so few of the blessings of Christianity appear in Christendom. We hold
this truth in words. Who feels its vitalising power? When brought home as a reality in social
life it will transform the world. All other reforms of society are superficial. But a better day is
coming. Cannot we become the heralds of this better day? Let our hearts bid it welcome! Let

our lives reveal its beauty and its power! (W. E. Channing, D. D.)
The gospel for all mankind
It happened one evening, soon after I began my journey up the country, that I found my way to
the homestead of a Dutch Boer, of whom I begged a night’s lodging. It was nightfall and the
family must soon go to rest. But first, would the stranger address some words of Christian
counsel to them? Gladly I assented and the big barn was resorted to. Looking round on my
congregation, I saw my host and hostess with their family. There were crowds of black forms
hovering near at hand, but never a one was there in the barn. I waited, hoping they might be
coming. But no; no one came. Still I waited as expecting something. “What ails you?” said the
farmer. “Why don’t you begin?” “May not your servants come too?” I replied. “Servants!”
shouted the master; “do you mean the Hottentots, man? Are you mad to think of preaching to
Hottentots? Go to the mountains and preach to the baboons; or, if you like, I’ll fetch my dogs,
and you may preach to them!” This was too much for my feelings, and tears began to trickle
down my cheeks. I opened my New Testament, and read out for my text the words, “Truth,
Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.” A second time the words
were read, and then my host, vanquished by the arrow from God’s own quiver, cried out, “Stop!
you must have your own way. I’ll get you all the Hottentots, and they shall hear you.” The barn
soon filled with rows of dark forms, whose eager looks gazed at the stranger. I then preached my
first sermon to the heathen. I shall never forget that night. (Dr. Moffat.)
God’s favours not to be limited to a single people
But, clearly, such a gospel as this was not meant for one or two men, or for a company of men, or
for a favourite nation, or for a race. “Is He the God of the Jews only?” was St. Paul’s indignant
question, addressed to those who would have limited His favours down to a single people. Like
the natural sun in the heavens, the Incarnate Son of Righteousness is the property—we may dare
to use the word—He is the property of all the members of the human family. All have a right to
the light and to the warmth which radiate from His sacred person and from His redeeming
Cross; and this explains St. Paul’s sense of the justice of proclaiming the good news of the
reconciliation of earth and heaven by faith in Christ to all members of the human family. Every
man, as such, has a right to his share in the gospel, just as every man has a right to air, and to
water, and to freedom, and at least to sufficient food to preserve bodily life; and not to preach
the gospel, and treat it as if it were the luxury of a small clique like any one of the old
philosophies, like a rare book in a library, like a family portrait, was to offend against the sense
of natural justice. (Canon Liddon.)
Do we then make void the law through faith?—
Law and faith, the two great moral forces in human history
“The law” means that which is written in every man’s soul, and republished on Sinai. “Faith”
means the gospel, “the glad tidings” of sovereign love to a ruined world. These two great moral
forces of the world may be looked upon in three aspects.
I. As agreeing in some respects.
1. In authorship. Both are Divine.

2. In spirit. Love is the moral essence, the inspiration of both.
3. In purpose. The well-being of humanity is the grand aim of both.
II. As differing in some features.
1. One is older in human history than the other. The law is as old as the human soul. The
gospel began with man after the Fall (Gen_3:15).
2. One addresses man as a creature, the other as a sinner. Law comes to man as a rational
and responsible existent, and demands his homage; the gospel comes to him as a ruined
sinner, and offers him assistance and restoration.
3. The one speaks imperatively, the other with compassion. “Thou shalt,” “Thou shalt not,”
is the voice of law. The gospel invites, “Let the wicked forsake his way”; “Come unto Me”;
“Ho, everyone that thirsteth.”
4. The “law” demands, the “gospel” delivers. The law says, Do this and that, or Desist from
this or that, and will hear no excuse. The gospel comes and offers deliverance from the
morally feeble and condemned state into which man has fallen.
III. As cooperating to one result. The law prepares for the gospel by carrying the conviction of
sin and ruin. The gospel exalts and enthrones the law. This is the point of the text, “Do we then
make void the law through faith? God forbid.” How does the gospel establish the law?
1. It presents it to man in the most commanding aspects.
2. It enthrones it in the soul.
3. It glorifies it in the life. (D. Thomas, D. D.)
How the law may be made void or established through faith
I. How it may be made void.
1. By not preaching it at all.
2. By teaching that faith supersedes the necessity of holiness.
3. By continuing in sin.
II. How it may be established.
1. By insisting on the whole doctrine of godliness.
2. By urging faith in Christ as a means to holiness.
3. By establishing it in our hearts and lives. (J. Wesley, M. A.)
The law made void and established
I. The law is made void—
1. By imagining that the covenant in Christ is unconditional.
2. That justification is eternal.
3. Consequently that a believer is not under the law at all.
II. The law is established—

1. In the heart.
2. As a part of the covenant.
3. By the obedience of faith. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
The law established by faith
God cannot deny or contradict Himself. He cannot recall His own words or disannul His own
law (Mal_3:6). Yet it might seem, at first sight, as if grace were opposed to law, so that
whichever be established, the other must fall. St. Paul anticipates and meets this difficulty.
Consider—
I. The ground or object of faith.
1. In the preceding verses we find two important points.
(1) We “are justified freely by His grace” (Rom_3:24). God forgives us our sins in a most
frank and absolute manner, without regard to any good works on our part, in the way of
compensation. But
(2) He does this” through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” Here we see the
qualifying condition of the Divine clemency. He upholds His law. If He forgives us our
sins, it is because He has first redeemed us by the sacrifice of His Son. God has made
Him our substitute, and treated Him as we deserve to be treated.
2. Here two questions occur.
(1) Is such a propitiation allowable in justice? We answer that it would be unjust for God
to compel a third party to suffer for sinners; but when One comes forward willingly, it is
no outrage to our sense of righteousness for His offer to be accepted. But still it might
seem unjust for an innocent substitute to suffer the penalty forever. We instinctively feel
that the penalty must be temporary. But, further, if any sense of wrong should still linger
it would surely be removed if we could see the substitute compensated for his self-
sacrifice. Behold how these things all meet in Christ. As to voluntariness (see Joh_10:17-
18). As to the duration of Christ’s sufferings, we know that, though terrible and severe,
they were of short continuance. And then look at his ensuing reward. If there were “the
sufferings of Christ,” there was also the “glory that should follow.”
(2) Is this particular propitiation adequate to the occasion? If all that Christ suffered had
been endured by a mere man, or even an angel, we should not feel convinced of its
efficacy. But Christ is an incarnation of Deity. The immortal Creator cannot Himself die;
but He can ally Himself to a human nature which may suffer and die, and in His
suffering and death Jehovah Himself may be so implicated as to justify the expression
that “God hath purchased the Church with His own blood,” and that the Jews “crucified
the Lord of glory.” Here it is that we see the ground of the infinite meritoriousness and
expiating efficacy of the death of Christ. Rather than the law should be broken, or that
sin should go unpunished, God gives up His own Son. What than this can more
effectually persuade us that the “wages of sin” is death? What than this can more vividly
inspire us with hatred of sin, or more powerfully deter the tempted from rebellion, arrest
the criminal, or incite the obedient to watchful diligence and reverential fear?
3. Thus are the high ends of justice secured by the death of Christ: and thus is the law
established in its broadest moral commands, and satisfied in its deepest moral
requirements. From this it will be easy to see how also in a lower sense the law is established

by faith.
(1) Do you speak of the ceremonial law? It was the shadow of good things to come: its
substance is Christ, and now He has come it has passed away, so far as its form is
concerned; but it still lives in its substance and antitype, by whom it has been ratified.
(2) Similarly with the prophetic Scriptures. The prophets all testified of Christ, and in
Him their word is at once accomplished and confirmed. And thus, in every sense, we may
boldly say with Paul, “We establish the law.”
II. The conditions and operations of faith. Here the same principle holds good.
1. In the act of faith the penitent trusts in the atoning death of Jesus Christ as the ground of
his acceptance. Now this act of faith—
(1) Is in accordance with God’s command (Joh_6:29). Thus is faith essentially obedience
to God’s law, and by it the authority of God in His law is acknowledged and established.
(2) It acquiesces in Christ’s atoning work: as an arrangement which vindicates the
Divine righteousness. It thus acknowledges the validity of God’s law, and the need of
sustaining its authority.
2. The preliminary condition of faith is repentance. It is not the hardened unhumbled sinner
who is told to believe in Christ, but those who acknowledge that the law is holy, and tremble
and weep to think how they have broken it.
3. So with the fruit of faith. When we are forgiven it is that we may serve sin no more
(Tit_2:11-15).
Conclusion:
1. The greatest sinner may be forgiven (1Co_6:9-11).
2. The least sinner must be saved by grace through faith.
3. See the guilt of refusing to be justified by faith.
4. The duty of the forgiven man to run in the way of God’s commandments (1Pe_1:13-16).
(T. G. Horton.)
The law established through faith
I. The objection stated. Faith supersedes—
1. The authority of the law by releasing the sinner from its curse.
2. The righteousness of the law as a basis of justification.
II. The objection obviated. Faith establishes the law by restoring—
1. Its power of command.
2. Its power of condemnation.
III. The objection retorted. The objector who blends faith and works undermines.
1. Its power of condemnation.
2. Its power of command. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The law established through faith
I. Faith establishes the law.
1. In its character as holy.
2. In its claims as just.
3. In its threatenings as sure.
II. Obedience to the law is promoted by the gospel.
1. In the motives it supplies.
2. In the strength it supplies. (T. Robinson, D. D.)
The law established through faith
1. The apostle here means that the Divine law must be regarded by us as immutable, and
that any interpretation of the gospel at variance with that fact must be a false interpretation.
The distinctions between right and wrong are everlasting, and that law of which the apostle
speaks helps us to make the distinction.
2. You stand related to—
(1) A holy Being. Then you ought to reverence that Being because of His rectitude and
truthfulness.
(2) A good Being: well, you ought to love that goodness. Conceive of a holy and good
Being to have put forth these properties to shield you from evil, and of conferring upon
you much good—why, then, ought you not to feel grateful toward that Being? One thing
more. Suppose that Being to be infinitely good and holy, and suppose Him to have put
forth those perfections to secure for you, either in fact or purpose, infinite blessings, then
ought you not to reverence and love Him with all your heart, and soul, and mind, and
strength?
3. I need not remind you that such is the character of God, and that such are the relations in
which we stand to Him.
(1) And while these last, so long must that law be binding upon us which requires our
utmost consecration to Him simply as an act of right, giving to God the things that are
God’s. God’s rectitude, therefore, binds Him to vindicate His law and punish wrong.
(2) His benevolence must bind Him to this. For sin is not simply the putting of so much
wrong in the place of so much right; it is the putting of what defiles God’s work in the
place of what gives to it beauty; of deformity and misery in the place of that which would
give nobleness and blessedness to His creatures, and the threadwork of retribution that
is wrought in with the forms of sin in this world are such as clearly to mark how He
abhors this evil. See how drunkenness and licentiousness make the very flesh of men to
cry out against the wrongs that are done to it; and how those evil passions of the soul,
such as pride, anger, malice, and the like, are made to be as very scorpions to the nature
in which you find them. Yes, God has constituted the nature of the human spirit thus,
that it shall find happiness only where He finds happiness; that it shall know how to do
homage to right, and to love the good. In other words, this law of God is what it is
because God is what He is. It comes from His own nature, and it is designed to uphold
the God-like.
4. Now there are those who look on the gospel as at variance with the law. This cannot be.

(1) Faith is the gift of God; and if the law comes from His nature, and this faith also
comes from His nature, He cannot be a fountain sending forth sweet waters and bitter.
(2) Faith is obedience to the Divine command; and if the mandate is that we are to
believe on His Son Jesus Christ, there can be nothing inconsistent between the
conformity to a law that comes from Him, and obedience to this particular mandate that
comes from Him.
(3) The things that are created from the very act of believing ensure that this shall not be
so. For to believe in Christ is to believe in His teaching, e.g., the doctrine of ruin by sin.
Well, sin is transgression of the law. Belief in Christ is belief in redemption from sin,
from the condemnation that sin has brought upon us. If the condemnation that has come
upon me from sin be not just, then the redemption that is said to have been brought to
me by Christ must be superfluous; so that faith in Christ comes necessarily of belief in
law. You cannot receive the gospel without receiving the law; you cannot understand the
one without apprehending the other.
(4) Then the very truths that are apprehended have in them a natural fitness so to
change the spirit of man that he who is at enmity with law is brought back to loyalty. The
purpose of these things is to make the disobedient obedient.
(5) Added to this we are assured that any obedience possible to us in any form, whether
in a converted or unconverted state, is never to be allowed to come into the place—
imperfect as it must necessarily be—of that perfect righteousness which the law
demands. And you cannot make void the law more than by attempting to put your own
real or supposed obedience in the place of that perfect obedience which the law requires.
5. Now, I do not mean to say that there is not a right state and tendency of mind in the
experience of the man who believes in Christ: it must be a state of mind right in itself—right
from God’s command, right from the nature of the thing; then like will produce like. But
though there is a rightness—or righteousness—in faith and flowing from faith which are
good as far as they go, what man wants to meet the claims of the Divine law is not a rightness
good as far as it goes, but a rightness good altogether. The law is made void, put aside, comes
to nothing, when you get rid of the necessity of the perfect obedience which it demands. Any
attempt to build upon your own personal sanctity as a ground of acceptance with God must
be a mistake. If we trust in the righteousness of Christ at all we cannot presume to think that
it needs to be eked out and to be made perfect by ours. (R. Vaughan, D. D.)
The law established by faith
I. The doctrine of faith is the doctrine of salvation through the blood and righteousness of the
Son of God. No good disposition or qualification whatever, nothing, in short, that distinguishes
one man from another, can be joined with the righteousness of Christ as the ground of our
confidence towards God. Here there is no room for boasting. We must be saved either
completely by grace, or completely by our own works.
II. Two ways in which the law may be said to be destroyed, or made void.
1. In principle; when any doctrine is taught which, in its just consequences, has a tendency
to relax our obligations to obey the law of God.
2. In practice; when persons take encouragement from mistaken views of gospel truths to
continue in sin, or to be less punctual in discharging the duties which they owe to God or
their fellow creatures.

III. The law of God is not made void, but established through faith.
1. The sacred authority and perpetual obligation of the law of God are vindicated in the
strongest manner by the doctrine of faith.
2. There are new obligations superadded by the gospel to enforce obedience.
(1) A conviction of its infinite evil must surely be allowed to be a powerful motive to
depart from sin. But by what means can this conviction be produced to such a degree as
by a firm belief of the doctrine of faith relating to the sufferings and death of Christ.
(2) Just apprehensions of the holiness of God have always been found to produce
correspondent effects on the characters of the persons who entertain them. Now, the
doctrine of faith gives us the highest display of this glorious attribute of the Divine
nature.
(3) The motives which are chiefly insisted upon in the New Testament, and which the
gospel in a peculiar manner inspires, are love and gratitude. Now, where can we find
such objects to awaken our love and gratitude as in the gospel of Jesus Christ?
3. The law is established through faith, because obedience is one of the principal ends for
which we are called to believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ.
4. The law is established through faith, because the doctrine of faith furnishes the believer
with the most powerful encouragements, in his endeavours to attain holiness.
(1) From what has been said, you may judge whether you are possessed of true faith in
the gospel. Has it come to you, not in word only, but in power also, and in the Holy
Ghost?
(2) From this subject let me exhort true believers to justify the sincerity of their
profession by the holiness of their lives. (D. Black.)
The law established through faith
Faith—
1. Better explains it.
2. Better enforces it.
3. Better secures the ends it proposes. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
The moral law established by faith in Christ
The ceremonial law was a mere law of expediency, and served to answer the Divine purposes in
the times of Jewish ignorance, until the bringing in of a better covenant to which the types
pointed; and when they were swept aside as a handwriting of ordinances, there was no
infringement made on the moral law, which, as an unchangeable code of moral requirements,
was to stand in full force to the end of time.
I. This moral law is—
1. Transcendently exalted in its source. It is a transcript of the Divine nature. And as, from
His infinite perfections, God can only will what is right, so all created intelligences are bound
to obey His commandments.

2. Reasonable in its requirements. All laws ought to be for the welfare of the subjects, and
the dignity of the throne, so that self-interest might prompt to obedience, and a love to the
monarch lead to all due respect for the administration. Jehovah’s laws will be found
admirably adapted to accomplish these ends, for they only enjoin what contributes to our
happiness, and prohibit what would tend to our misery. “Blessed are they that keep His
commandments.”
3. Universal in its application. It requires no more than man should perform; viz., to love the
Lord his God, etc.
4. Unchangeable in its nature. For being holy, just, and good, Jehovah could as soon change
the perfections of His nature as to change the purity of the moral law, or to substitute an
opposite one in its stead.
5. Indispensable in its demands. It must be obeyed; its violation must be pardoned, or its
penalty must be endured.
II. Faith establishes the law.
1. As a rule of moral action throughout our whole probation.
(1) Christ could be the author of no system of salvation that would supersede it. For
otherwise His mission would be a curse instead of a blessing, by favouring wickedness in
abolishing that standard of righteousness that would deter from sin.
(2) And if we deny that we are bound to fulfil that law, then we have no infallible
standard by which to measure moral actions. For conscience, except it be regulated by
the law of morality, is no sure guide. This is fully established by experience; for when the
revealed rule is set aside, men, with the approbation of their own consciences, often run
to the most disgraceful extremes.
2. As a medium of happiness (Psa_1:1-3). In every circumstance of life the law of God will
beam a light on our path that cannot be dimmed by the trials and sorrows through which we
may pass. And while we are walking according to this rule, “all things will work together for
good to them that love God.” Obedience brings an evidence of God’s love, a peace of
conscience, a joy in the Holy Ghost, and a clear prospect of heaven.
3. As an infallible standard in the day of judgment, by which we shall be tried, approved, or
condemned. This strict procedure of that day calls for a proper standard by which good and
evil shall be discriminated and judged.
4. As a correct and eternal standard of the proper amount of rewards and punishments. (W.
Barns.)
The doctrine of justification by faith only vindicated from the charge of
encouraging licentiousness
I. The objection, that faith makes void the law.
1. The moral law is that rule to which from our relation to God we are obliged to conform.
This obligation is founded on the nature of things, which nothing ever can dissolve. Should a
doctrine, then, tend to warrant the inference that it might be relaxed, this would constitute
sufficient ground for rejecting it. But such is not the tendency of our doctrine. On the
contrary, it presupposes this obligation. There would have been no occasion for such a
method of deliverance from the penal effects of offences committed against the law, but on
the supposition of the antecedent obligation to obey the law. And is the sinner less bound to

render obedience when he is pardoned, than when he was in a state of guilt?
2. In respect to the measure of the required obedience the objection falls to the ground. This
law requires universal, unsinning obedience, and accounts every deviation to be sin. Should
any interpretation, then, of Scripture be advanced, which shall reduce this measure of
obedience, it would be justly rejected, as being dishonourable to God, contradictory to the
Scriptures, and to the interests of morality. But the tendency of our doctrine is the exact
opposite. It teaches us that we must be justified by faith, because the unsinning obedience
required by the law renders it impossible that we can ever be justified by works. Were the
law less holy, less rigorous in its demands, there would then be no necessity for this method
of justification. But since righteousness cannot be attained by the law, the righteousness of
faith is manifested in the gospel. Does faith, then, make void the law? No. It implies in the
strongest manner the extensive nature of that obedience which the law requires.
3. But may not the doctrine supersede the necessity of any obedience at all? No; for—
(1) Mark the grounds on which the necessity of obedience to the moral law is founded.
Because without it man would be unfit to enter into the presence of God, and unable to
participate in the holy felicity of heaven (Heb_12:14; Mat_5:8).
(2) Advert next to the particular nature of justification. It is simply one part of salvation
—that part by which the guilt of sin is removed, and the sinner is reconciled to God.
While it declares that no holiness has any share in atoning for sin, or in reconciling us to
God, it does not therefore intimate that no holiness is requisite to qualify us for the
enjoyment of our purchased inheritance. An invalid criminal receives a pardon. If we
should assert that the state of his health had no connection with the mercy received, such
an assertion could never be construed to imply that his recovery from sickness was
unconnected with his future happiness. Because his obligation to punishment has been
remitted by an act of grace, it cannot therefore be inferred that health is unnecessary to
his enjoyment of the royal bounty. Nay, we should rather say that his deliverance from
the sentence rendered the removal of his disorder a blessing more than ever desirable. So
justification provides a remedy for the penal consequences which past disobedience has
incurred; but it leaves the necessity of personal holiness to rest on the same foundation
on which it always had rested, on the impossibility of holding communion with God, and
of partaking in His felicity, without possessing corresponding dispositions, and being
made partakers of His holiness. If, then, the method of justifying the sinner by faith only
tends neither to weaken the obligation to obey the moral law, nor to reduce the measure
of the required obedience, nor to supersede the necessity of obedience, in what sense
does it make void the law? In no sense whatever.
II. The assertion that faith establishes the law. Far from producing effects unfavourable to the
cause of morality, it tends to strengthen and promote it by motives of the most exalted nature,
and of the most constraining obligation.
1. What is the state of the justified sinner? Under a conviction of the danger and misery of
sin, looking unto Jesus, he has found peace and joy in believing. The ground of all his
present peace and future prospects is a comfortable hope of his acceptance in the beloved.
Let this hope be once destroyed, his peace is broken, his prospects are clouded. Still he is
under condemnation. To keep alive, then, this hope is one leading object which the justified
sinner has constantly in view. But how is the object to be accomplished? Doubtless the Holy
Ghost is the author of this blessed experience, “who beareth witness with our spirits that we
are the children of God.” But He usually evidences to us our adoption by reflecting light on
His own work of grace in the heart, and thus by enabling us to trace out the existence of the
cause by the effects evidently produced. Sanctification, as it is the earnest of future glory, so

it is an evidence, because a consequence, of our present reconciliation with God. Deliverance
from the power of sin is a blessing annexed by promise to a state of justification (chap. 6:14).
Observe what a constraining motive is thus provided to the attainment of universal holiness.
The peace, the hope, the joy of a sinner are inseparably connected with the evidence of his
interest in Christ.
2. But the faith which leads a sinner to Christ for justification includes a conviction, not only
of the danger, but also of the demerit of sin. In what light does he view himself? As a brand
plucked out of the fire; as a pardoned criminal, as a rebel graciously invested with all the
privileges of a loyal subject. What sentiments of love, gratitude, obedience, does this view
inspire!
3. These sentiments are still greatly augmented by a consideration of the means which have
been employed in this work of mercy (Gal_3:13). Redeemed with such a ransom, shall
sinners refuse to give their lives to Christ? (1Co_6:20; Tit_2:14). (E. Cooper.)
The gospel salvation confirms obedience,
by furnishing—
I. New views of truth. The believer receives new views of—
1. The perfection of the law in itself. His natural heart rebelled against it, and longed for
some standard which should grant indulgence to his sinful infirmities. Even the letter of the
law was too strict, and from the breadth of its spiritual application he recoiled. He hated the
commandments for their purity. In a renewed heart this spirit is entirely subdued, and that
the law is holy and just and good is thankfully acknowledged. There are, therefore, now new
and strong inducements to follow after the holiness which it exhibits, and thus the gospel
has not destroyed but confirmed the law.
2. His own character and life. His proud and self-confident spirit is broken down under the
consciousness of guilt, which quickens the desire for holiness, and increases the abhorrence
of transgression. Hence to lower the standard of obedience would bring no gratification. He
longs to do the perfect will of God, and is contented only as he can put off the old man and
put on the new, which is renewed in holiness.
3. Christ and His Cross. In this there is no countenance given to sin.
(1) It is the most solemn manifestation of God’s justice in dealing with sin. Beholding the
justice and severity of God thus displayed the justified sinner feels the abhorrence of sin
more deeply impressed; and as he looks upon his crucified Lord put to death by sin and
for sin the law gains a new power over him.
(2) It is the most amazing manifestation of the love of God for guilty man. The believer,
therefore, rejoicing in the confidence that His blood was shed for him that he might not
come into condemnation—how shall he by continuing in sin crucify the Son of God
afresh?
II. New motives of conduct.
1. Sincere gratitude and love to Christ who has redeemed him from the bondage of the law.
He looks upon himself as a captive, bought with a price, and love for his Redeemer
constrains him to serve and please Him. By this he is led to “perfect holiness in the fear of
God.”
2. Consciousness of exalted privilege, he is a pardoned man, and all his fear of the

consequences of his past guilt are replaced by the hope of heaven. He is adopted into God’s
family, and therefore has all the rights attaching to Divine Sonship, etc. What an assemblage
of motives to holiness! How can a man make void the law who has such privileges?
3. The perfect purity of heaven. The justified man looks forward to this as the perfection of
character, and consequently longs for the personal purity which alone can meeten him for it.
How, then, can faith make void the law when obedience to it is the only preparation for the
inheritance which faith expects?
III. New means of attaining this obedience. The work of the Holy Spirit is peculiar to the gospel,
and whatever holiness any man attains is given by Him. In his own nature man has no strength
to obey the law; but the whole influence of the heavenly Agent is directed to the ultimate point of
man’s entire obedience to God. To attain this He maintains an unceasing warfare within the
renewed soul, and having brought him to the glorious privilege of being a child of God, He
enables him to walk worthy of his high vocation. (S. H. Tyng, D. D.)
Religion and morality
1. There are many who cannot see the difference between criticising a weak argument and
attacking the thing it purposes to prove. St. Paul had here been saying severe things of that
spurious morality which consists simply of obedience to outward rules; and there were
foolish auditors who concluded that he was assailing the moral law, the thing expressed in
these rules. His answer is, that he was attacking not law, but legalism. St. Paul maintains
that, by trying to substitute the principle of faith for that of blind obedience to an external
rule, so far from making void the law he was really establishing the law.
2. The question here discussed, from a modern point of view, is one as to the relation
between religion and morality. Can a man be virtuous who is not pious, or, if he can, does his
virtue lack a quality which only piety can infuse into him? There are few who would maintain
that the Christian religion has had a bad influence on virtue; they only contend that virtue is
independent of religion. And I think there are many plausible considerations which lend, at
least, a colourable pretext to this contention.
(1) No one, e.g., will question that there are not a few of blameless lives who entertain
grave doubts as to the Christian faith. Are we to deny the reality of these men’s virtue; or,
if not, are we to conclude that it makes no difference whether a man is a religious man or
no? Again, it has been often urged, that whilst conduct is a test, religious character and
belief is not. Sometimes religious belief is a mere accident. Bow many of those who
conform to the faith and worship of our country would have given an equally firm
adherence to the faith and worship of another country?
(2) On the other hand, do we never find that religion may exist without morality? Is
there not some ground for the assertion that it is in the religious and not in the secular
world that intolerance, uncharitableness, and the like often attain their rankest growth?
3. Are we Christians, then, driven to the admission that there is no connection between our
Christian faith and our goodness of life? Or, at least, are we driven to the confession that
morality gains nothing from religion? No. All the apparent incongruities notwithstanding, I
maintain that religion and morality are inseparably united; that that morality is at the best a
poor, shallow thing which is not fed from the fount of a genuine Christian faith. Whenever,
in its power and reality, the faith of Christ takes possession of a soul, we find that it
transfigures into new beauty and nobleness all the higher elements of our nature, expanding
the horizon of intelligence, kindling the spiritual imagination by a vision of a fairer than

earthly beauty, infusing a new and keener sensitiveness into the conscience, a new
tenderness into the affections, arming the will with a new commanding power over the
passions, breathing, amidst all our struggles and efforts in this passing life, a sweeter,
serener peace into the heart, and shedding over all the dim, dark future the light of a diviner,
heavenlier hope.
4. There are many ways in which the influence of Christian faith on the moral life may be
shown, as, e.g., by pointing out the influence of the sense of God’s redeeming love in Christ
Jesus, and of the hope of immortality on the moral life; but passing by these I fix attention
on the fact that—
I. The faith of Christ reveals to us a new and infinite ideal or standard of goodness.
1. Eighteen hundred years ago there broke upon the world a vision of human perfection, a
revelation of the hidden possibilities of our nature, transcending far all that the race had ever
witnessed or conceived; and if we ask today what is the secret of the wondrous power over
the hearts and lives of men the Christ-life has had, shall we answer that Christ set us simply
a perfect example of human virtue? Had it been nothing more, I believe that there are dim
aspirations in these breasts of ours which had never started into life; that there are secret
anticipations of an immortal destiny which would never have awakened within us. But I
believe that the secret of the transforming power of the life of the Son of God lies simply in
this, that it calls us to be sons of God.
2. I can well conceive that to many this conception of the religious life may have an air of
extravagance. When one thinks of the multitudes who are sunk in ignorance and vice, and of
the dull routine of commonplace respectability, which is the best that most of us can boast
of, it may seem the excess of fanaticism to talk of such a nature that its proper destiny is
nothing less than sharing in God’s life. And yet think for a moment. Outside of the sphere of
religion there are in souls indications of infinitude—a sense of a nature that is one with God.
(1) When, e.g., the book of nature becomes intelligible, when beneath seemingly
orderless confusion, or contingency and accident in the phenomena and facts of the
world, the man of science begins to comprehend the presence of unseen but eternal laws
shedding the light of design, of order, of reason over the visible world, what is the
meaning of all this? What but this: that in the study of nature I am simply thinking God’s
thoughts after Him; I am simply proving that the mind within me responds to the mind
that is impressed on all things without me.
(2) What, again, is the meaning of that even deeper sympathy with nature which finds
expression in what we call the sense of the beautiful, the feeling of sensitive persons, with
a kind of ecstasy when they look upon the grander scenes of this glorious world? What
but this, that man cannot merely observe the glory and beauty of nature but, as face
answers to face in a glass, the soul of man is strung in sympathy with the very mind that
made it.
(3) So in the sphere of a higher and diviner art, in the life of endeavour after goodness.
How shall we explain this, that the better a man is the less content is he with himself?
Why is it that in the moral life our aspirations become more elevated, and ever as we
ascend we see the moral life unsealed rising before us? Why, but for this reason, that the
soul of man was made for God, that with nothing less than a Divine perfection can it ever
be satisfied?
II. The religion of Christ not only reveals to us an infinite ideal of goodness, but it assures us of
the power to realise it. It says to you not merely, “This is what you ought to be,” but, “This is
what you may and can be.” Apart from this, the gospel would be no good news. As you know that
the first ray of light your eye catches, gilding the eastern horizon in the morning, is to you the

sure pledge and prophecy of the coming perfect day; or, as you know, that the future plant is
potentially contained in the little seed or germ, so the first movement in a human breast of true
spiritual life, the first throb of genuine self-devotion to Christ is fraught with the newborn
perfection and beauty of the life that is hid with Christ in God. The religious life indeed, like
other life, is progressive, and here, as elsewhere, effort, struggle, conflict are the inevitable
conditions of progress. Here lies the power over evil, the conquering impulse of the Christian
life, that if only we be true to God and ourselves the final victory is sure. The sun and rain and
dew, all the genial influences of nature, will not make a stone grow, but the tiniest germ, the
fragile plant, just peeping above the soil, has in it a secret principle which can transmute air,
earth, sunlight, moisture into means of its development, and so the heaven born life has in it the
vitalising, the assimilating forces that will make “all things” in this our earthly existence, “all
things” in the moral atmosphere, “work together for its good,” and bear it onward to perfection.
If the Spirit of Christ dwell in your heart today and mould your life, nothing in heaven or earth
or hell can ever, ever baulk you of your Christian hope. (Principal Caird.).
HAWKER, “Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law
of faith. (28) Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
(29) Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: (30)
Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through
faith. (31) Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
The Apostle having shewn, and by means so clear and plain, the way of salvation to be only in
Christ, and by Christ; now returns back to his original subject, in relation to the total inability of
either Jew, or Gentile, justifying themselves before God. And, to do this with greater, force of
argument, he puts every objection which the weakness, or perversity of the human mind,
untaught of God, might bring into the form of questions. Where is boasting then? It is excluded.
By what law of works? Nay, but by the law of faith. Everything is excluded in the creature, while
Christ alone is exalted in the infinite greatness, and glories of his Person, and in the infinite
merit of his work, in his blood shedding, and righteousness. The, Jew and Gentile are
distinctions but in name, while Christ is all, and in all. For God, as a Covenant God in Christ, is
the God of both, in every individual instance of his Church, given by God to Christ, and chosen
by God in Christ, before the foundation of the world,
Eph_1:4. This ancient settlement of
eternity took place, not only before the name of Jew or Gentile were known, but before sin had
entered into the world to make those distinctions; yea, before the world itself was called into
being. And therefore, as the Church of Christ had being in Christ, from everlasting; the recovery
of the Church from the Adam-fall by sin, in this time-state of her being, had been all along
provided for: and Christ’s people, whether Jew or Gentile, were his, and the objects of his love,
and grace, and favor, from all eternity. So that He that is the God in Covenant for the Jew, is also
for the Gentile; seeing it is His justification of them, whether circumcised or uncircumcised, and
not their different claims to favor, which becomes the cause of their acceptance. And so far is all
this blessed and approved way, of being wholly justified by Christ, from setting aside the law,
that in fact it becomes the only establishment of it. Since it proves, that rather than one jot or
tittle of God’s holy law should fail; the Son of God shall fulfil all its righteous demands, and give
his soul an offering for sin, for the breaches of it by his people. And, it is the joy of all the
redeemed, as well in heaven, as earth, that by the obedience and death of Christ, the Son of God
in our nature, hath done more to magnify, and make honorable, God’s holy law, than could have
been done by the unsinning obedience of the whole creation of (God, to all eternity, Dan_9:24.

28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart
from observing the law.
?tW ed5v,Therefore - As the result of the previous train of argument.
That a man - That all who are justified; that is, that there is no other way.
Is justified by faith - Is regarded and treated as righteous, by believing in the Lord Jesus
Christ.
Without the deeds of the law - Without works as a meritorious ground of justification.
The apostle, of course, does not mean that Christianity does not produce good works, or that
they who are justified will not obey the Law, and be holy; but that no righteousness of their own
will be the ground of their justification. They are sinners; and as such can have no claim to he
treated as righteous. God has devised a plan by which, they may be pardoned and saved; and
that is by faith alone. This is the grand uniqueness of the Christian religion. This was the special
point in the reformation from popery. Luther often called this doctrine of justification by faith
the article upon which the church stood or fell - articulus stantis, vel cadentis ecclesiae - and it is
so. If this doctrine is held entire, all others will be held with it. If this is abandoned, all others
will fall also. It may be remarked here, however, that this doctrine by no means interferes with
the doctrine that good works are to be performed by Christians. Paul urges this as much as any
other writer in the New Testament. His doctrine is, that they are not to be relied on as a ground
of justification; but that he did not mean to teach that they are not to be performed by Christians
is apparent from the connection, and from the following places in his epistles:
Rom_2:7;
2Co_9:8; Eph_2:10; 1Ti_2:10; 1Ti_5:10, 1Ti_5:25; 1Ti_6:18; 2Ti_3:17; Tit_2:7, Tit_2:14;
Tit_3:8; Heb_10:24. That we are not justified by our works is a doctrine which he has urged and
repeated with great power and frequency. See Rom_4:2, Rom_4:6; Rom_9:11, Rom_9:32;
Rom_11:6; Gal_2:16; Gal_3:2, Gal_3:5,Gal_3:10; Eph_2:9; 2Ti_1:9.
CLARKE, “Therefore we conclude, etc. - Seeing these things cannot be denied, viz., that
all have sinned: that all are guilty, that all are helpless: that none can deliver his own soul, and
that God, in his endless mercy, has opened a new and living way to the holiest by the blood of
Jesus, Heb_10:19, Heb_10:20, etc: therefore we, apostles and Christian teachers, conclude,
λογιζοLεθα, prove by fair, rational consequence, that a man - any man, is justified - has his sins
blotted out, and is received into the Divine favor, by faith in Christ’s blood, without the deeds of
the law, which never could afford, either to Jew or Gentile, a ground for justification, because
both have sinned against the law which God has given them, and, consequently, forfeited all
right and title to the blessings which the obedient might claim.
GILL, “Therefore we conclude,.... This is the conclusion from the premises, the sum total of
the whole account:

that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. The subject of justification
is, "man", not in opposition to angels; nor does it design the Jew against the Gentile, though
some have so thought; but the apostle names neither Jew nor Gentile, but "man", to show that
Christ's righteousness is unto all, and every man, that believes, be he who he will; and is to be
understood indefinitely, that every man that is justified is justified by faith. The means is "by
faith", not habitually or actually considered; that is, either as an habit and principle infused into
us, or as an act performed by us; but either organically, as it is a means of receiving Christ's
righteousness; or objectively, as it denotes Christ the object of it: and all this is done "without
works", of any sort; not by a faith which is without works, for such a faith is dead, and of no
avail; but by faith without works joined to it, in the affair of justification; or by the righteousness
of Christ imputed by God the Father, without any consideration of them, and received by faith,
and relied upon by the believer, without any regard unto them.
'jsJtE <From all this he draws this conclusion (
Rom_3:28): That a man is justified by faith
without the deeds of the law.
III. In the close of the chapter he shows the extent of this privilege of justification by faith, and
that it is not the peculiar privilege of the Jews, but pertains to the Gentiles also; for he had said
(Rom_3:22) that there is no difference: and as to this, 1. He asserts and proves it (Rom_3:29):
Is he the God of the Jews only? He argues from the absurdity of such a supposition. Can it be
imagined that a God of infinite love and mercy should limit and confine his favours to that little
perverse people of the Jews, leaving all the rest of the children of men in a condition eternally
desperate? This would by no means agree with the idea we have of the divine goodness, for his
tender mercies are over all his works; therefore it is one God of grace that justifies the
circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith, that is, both in one and the same
way. However the Jews, in favour of themselves, will needs fancy a difference, really there is no
more difference than between by and through, that is, no difference at all. 2. He obviates an
objection (Rom_3:31), as if this doctrine did nullify the law, which they knew came from God:
“No,” says he, “though we do say that the law will not justify us, yet we do not therefore say that
it was given in vain, or is of no use to us; no, we establish the right use of the law, and secure its
standing, by fixing it on the right basis. The law is still of use to convince us of what is past, and
to direct us for the future; though we cannot be saved by it as a covenant, yet we own it, and
submit to it, as a rule in the hand of the Mediator, subordinate to the law of grace; and so are so
far from overthrowing that we establish the law.” Let those consider this who deny the
obligation of the moral law on believers.
BiwahesE <Therefore we conclude, etc. — It is the unavoidable tendency of dependence
upon our own works, less or more, for acceptance with God, to beget a spirit of “boasting.” But
that God should encourage such a spirit in sinners, by any procedure of His, is incredible. This
therefore stamps falsehood upon every form of “justification by works,” whereas the doctrine
that
Our faith receives a righteousness
That makes the sinner just,
manifestly and entirely excludes “boasting”;
and this is the best evidence of its truth.

gtsFo 9v428.We then conclude, etc. He now draws the main proposition, as one that is incontrovertible,
and adds an explanation. Justification by faith is indeed made very clear, while works are expressly
excluded. Hence, in nothing do our adversaries labor more in the present day than in attempts to blend faith
with the merits of works. They indeed allow that man is justified by faith; but not by faith alone; yea, they
place the efficacy of justification in love, though in words they ascribe it to faith. But Paul affirms in this
passage that justification is so gratuitous, that he makes it quite evident, that it can by no means be
associated with the merit of works. Why he names the works of the law, I have ALREADY explained; and
I have also proved that it is quite absurd to confine them to ceremonies. Frigid also is the gloss, that works
are to be taken for those which are outward, and done without the Spirit of Christ. On the contrary, the
word law that is added, means the same as though he called them meritorious; for what is referred to is
the REWARD promised in the law. (125)
What, James says, that man is not justified by faith alone, but also by works, does not at all militate against
the preceding view. The reconciling of the two views depends chiefly on the drift of the argument pursued by
James. For the question with him is not, how men attain righteousness before God, but how they prove to
others that they are justified, for his object was to confute hypocrites, who vainly boasted that they had faith.
Gross then is the sophistry, not to admit that the word, to justify, is taken in a different sense by James, from
that in which it is used by Paul; for they handle different subjects. The word, faith, is also no doubt capable
of various meanings. These two things must be taken to the ACCOUNT, before a correct judgment can
be formed on the point. We may learn from the context, that James meant no more than that man is not
made or proved to be just by a feigned or dead faith, and that he must prove his righteousness by his works.
See on this subject my Institutes.
(125)
The phrase , χωρίς ἔργων νό\ου may be rendered, “ the works of law,” that is, either natural or
revealed; for Gentiles as well as Jews are here contemplated. — Ed.

PULPIT, “
For
( γὰρ here, rather than οὗν , as in the Textus Receptus; though either reading rests on
good authority, γὰρ suits best the course of thought, as introducing a reason for the assertion of the previous
verse) we reckon that a man is justified by faith APART from works of law ; i.e. the law of
works, as a principle of justification, is, in fact, ACCORDING
particularly observed that χωρὶς ἔργων νό:ου implies no antinomian doctrine, nor any opposition to James
(Jas_2:14, etc.). Its reference is not at all to works required or not required from man for acceptance, but
simply to the ground or principle of his justification.
29 Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of
Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too,
rtW ed9v4Is he the God ... - The Jews supposed that he was the God of their nation only,
that they only were to be admitted to his favor. In these verses Paul showed that as all had alike
sinned, Jews and Gentiles; and as the plan of salvation by faith was adapted to sinners, without
any special reference to Jews; so God could show favors to all, and all might be admitted on the
same terms to the benefits of the plan of salvation.

It is one God - The same God, there is but one, and his plan is equally suited to Jews and
Gentiles.
The circumcision - Those who are circumcised - the Jews.
The uncircumcision - Gentiles; all who were not Jews.
By faith ...through faith - There is no difference in the meaning of these expressions. Both
denote that faith is the instrumental cause of justification, or acceptance with God.
CLARKE, “Is he the God of the Jews only? - Do not begin to suppose that because you
cannot be justified by the works of the law and God has in his mercy found out a new method of
saving you, that therefore this mercy shall apply to the Jews exclusively. Is not God the maker,
preserver, and redeemer, also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, as much as of the Jews;
for all have equally sinned and there is no reason, if God be disposed to show mercy at all, that
he should prefer the one to the other; since they are all equally guilty, sinful, and necessitous.
GILL, “Is he the God of the Jews only?.... The Jews made their boast of him as such, and
would not allow the Gentiles any interest in him: but
is he not also of the Gentiles? yes, of the Gentiles also: God is the God both of Jews and
Gentiles; not only as the Creator, preserver, and Governor of them, or as he has a right to
demand worship and service of them, but as he is their covenant God; not by virtue of the
covenant of circumcision, or by the Sinai Covenant, but by the covenant of grace; as appears by
his loving them in Christ, choosing them in him, putting them into his hands, providing
blessings of grace for them in him, and sending his Son to redeem them; by calling them by his
grace; by their sanctification, adoption, pardon, and justification; by taking out of them a people
for his name with whom he dwells, and of whom he takes care; and will never leave nor forsake:
all which may lead us to observe the distinguishing grace of God, the happiness of our state and
condition, and what encouragement we have for faith and hope in God.
Htarih IsαInference second: This and no other way of salvation is adapted alike to Jew and
Gentile.
Is he the God of the Jews only? etc. — The way of salvation must be one equally suited to
the whole family of fallen man: but the doctrine of justification by faith is the only one that lays
the basis of a Universal Religion; this therefore is another mark of its truth.
bt?(r Isα29.Is he the God of the Jews only? The second proposition is, that this righteousness belongs
no more to the Jews than to the Gentiles: and it was a great matter that this point should be urged,
in ORDER
that a free passage might be made for the kingdom of Christ through the whole world. He does
not then ask simply or expressly, whether God was the Creator of the Gentiles, which was admitted without
any dispute; but whether he designed to manifest himself as a Savior also to them. As he had put all
mankind on a LEVEL, and brought them to the same condition, if there be any difference between them, it
is from God, not from themselves, who have all things alike: but if it be true that God designs to make all the
nations of the earth partakers of his mercy, then salvation, and righteousness, which is necessary for
salvation, must be extended to all. Hence under the name, God, is conveyed an intimation of a mutual

relationship, which is often mentioned in Scripture, —
“ shall be to you a God, and you shall be to me a people.” (Jer_30:22.)
For the circumstance, that God, for a time, chose for himself a peculiar people, did not make void the origin
of mankind, who were all formed after THE IMAGE of God, and were to be brought up in the world in the
hope of a blessed eternity.
PULPIT, “Is God the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the

Gentiles also . This verse is in support of the doctrine, ALREADY
of justification through Christ being for all mankind alike without distinction or partiality; and it comes in here
in pursuance of the thought of the preceding verse. In it justification was said to be byfaith, and APART
from works of law, and therefore in itself AVAILABLE
as for the Jews, who had. And why should it not be so? Is not the God of the Jews their God too? Yes.
30 since there is only one God, who will justify the
circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that
same faith.
utW niIsαIs he the God ... - The Jews supposed that he was the God of their nation only,
that they only were to be admitted to his favor. In these verses Paul showed that as all had alike
sinned, Jews and Gentiles; and as the plan of salvation by faith was adapted to sinners, without
any special reference to Jews; so God could show favors to all, and all might be admitted on the
same terms to the benefits of the plan of salvation.
It is one God - The same God, there is but one, and his plan is equally suited to Jews and
Gentiles.
The circumcision - Those who are circumcised - the Jews.
The uncircumcision - Gentiles; all who were not Jews.
By faith ...through faith - There is no difference in the meaning of these expressions. Both
denote that faith is the instrumental cause of justification, or acceptance with God.
CLARKE, “Seeing it is one God -
VzὗzVπWVὗνWχW6Vχν. This has been rendered, Seeing God is
one. It however makes little difference in the sense: the apostle’s meaning most evidently is, it is
one and the same God who made both Jews and Gentiles, who shall justify - pardon, the
circumcision - the believing Jews, by faith; and the uncircumcision - the believing Gentiles, by
the same faith; as there is but one Savior and one atonement provided for the whole.
It is fanciful to suppose that the apostle has one meaning when he says, V5WzὗροV7ν, By faith,

and a different meaning when he says, gbkW12, πιστεως, Through faith. Both the prepositions are
to be understood in precisely the same sense; only the addition of the article της, in the last case,
extends and more pointedly ascertains the meaning. It is one and the same God who shall justify
the believing Jews by faith; and the believing Gentiles gbkW12,Wlb?1;[,, by That Same faith.
GILL, “Seeing it is one God,.... God is one in nature and essence, though there are three
persons in the Godhead, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; whence it appears, that he that is the God
of the Jews, is also the God of the Gentiles, or there would be more gods than one; and that
these are justified in one and the same manner, or God must be divided; for God, as he is one in
nature, so he is one in will, in his promises, and in the methods of his grace:
which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. The
objects of justification are "the circumcision", the circumcised Jews, and "the uncircumcision",
the uncircumcised Gentiles; the circumcision of the one does not forward, and the
uncircumcision of the other does not hinder, nor neither of them effect the grace of justification:
the justifier of them is one and the same, who is God; and the matter of their justification is the
same, which is the righteousness of Christ; and the manner of it, or the means of their
comfortable apprehension of it, is the same; for those phrases, "by faith", and "through faith",
mean one and the same thing; see Phi_3:9.
(taodh 9v4it is one God who shall justify — “has unchangeably fixed that He shall
justify.”
the circumcision by — “of”
faith, and the uncircumcision through faith — probably this is but a varied statement
of the same truth for greater emphasis (see Rom_3:22); though Bengel thinks that the
justification of the Jews, as the born heirs of the promise, may be here purposely said to be “of
faith,” while that of the Gentiles, previously “strangers to the covenants of promise,” may be said
to be “through faith,” as thus admitted into a new family.
gtsFo 9v430.Who shall justify, (127) etc. In saying that some are justified by faith, and some through
faith, he seems to have indulged himself in varying his language, while he expresses the same thing, and for
this end, — that he might, by the way, touch on the folly of the Jews, who imagined a difference between
themselves and the Gentiles, though on the SUBJECT
of justification there was no difference whatever;
for since men became partakers of this grace by faith only, and since faith in all is the same, it is absurd to
make a distinction in what is so much alike. I am hence led to think that there is something ironical in the
words, as though be said, — “ any wishes to have a difference made between the Gentile and the Jew, let
him take this, — that the one obtains righteousness by faith, and the otherthrough faith.”
But it may be, that some will prefer this distinction, — that the Jews were justified by faith, because they
were born the heirs of grace, as the right of adoption was transmitted to them from the Fathers, — and that
the Gentiles were justified through faith, because the covenant to them was adventitious.
(127)
The future is used for the present — “ justifies,” after the manner of the Hebrew language, though
some consider that the day of judgment is referred to; but he seems to speak of a present act, or as

[Grotius ] says, of a CONTINUED act, which the Hebrews expressed by the future tense. — Ed.
PULPIT, “If indeed ( εἴπερ rather than ἐπείπερ , as in the Textus Receptus) God is one, who
shall justify the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith. Here the unity of
God is given as the reason of his being the God of the Gentiles as well as of the Jews. So
also, 1Ti_2:5, εἷς γὰρ Θεὸς is the reason why he wills all men to be saved. It is of importance
to grasp St. Paul's idea in his assertions of the unity of God. It is not that of numerical unity,
but what may be called the unity of quality; i.e. not a mere assertion of monotheism as against
polytheism, but that the one God is one and the same to all, comprehending all in the embrace
of his own essential unity. God's unity involved in St. Paul's mind the idea of "One God, the
Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him" (1Co_8:6); "who made of one blood every
nation of men" (Act_17:26); in whom we (all of us) "live and move and have our being"
(Act_17:28). Thus exclusion of the Gentiles from the paternal embrace of the one God is
incompatible with the very idea, so conceived, of his unity. In the latter part of this verse it is
said that God will justify the circumcision ἐκ πίστεως , and the uncircumcision διὰ
τῆς πίστεως , the preposition being changed, and the second πίστεως being preceded by the
article. The difference is not of essential importance, "faith" being the emphatic word. But it
is not unmeaning. Ἐκ expresses the principle of justification; διὰ , the medium through which
it may be had. The Jew was ALREADY in a position for justification through the Law
leading up to Christ. He had only to accept it as of faith, and not of works of law (verse 20).
The Gentile must attain to it through faith; i.e. his faith in the gospel now revealed to
him. Ἐπὶ τῶν Ἰουδαίων τὸ ἀκ πίστεως τέθεικεν ὡς ἂν ἐγόντων #ὲν καὶ ἑτέρας ἀφορ#ὰς πρὸς
δικαίωσιν , πίστεως " (Theodorus).
eθscpsJ,Isg;,.Is.:SSCdOsg;,sSvJsνOsg;CwsdvCg;πs pgsat all!
Rather, we uphold the law.
utW niIsαDo we then make void the law - Do we render it vain and useless; do we destroy
its moral obligation; and do we prevent obedience to it, by the doctrine of justification by faith?
This was an objection which would naturally be made; and which has thousands of times been
since made, that the doctrine of justification by faith tends to licentiousness. The word “law”
here, I understand as referring to the moral law, and not merely to the Old Testament. This is
evident from
Rom_3:20-21, where the apostle shows that no man could be justified by deeds of
law, by conformity with the moral law. See the note.
God forbid - By no means. Note, Rom_3:4. This is an explicit denial of any such tendency.
Yea, we establish the law - That is, by the doctrine of justification by faith; by this scheme
of treating people as righteous, the moral law is confirmed, its obligation is enforced, obedience
to it is secured. This is done in the following manner:
(1) God showed respect to it, in being unwilling to pardon sinners without an atonement. He
showed that it could not be violated with impunity; that he was resolved to fulfil its threatenings.
(2) Jesus Christ came to magnify it, and to make it honorable. He showed respect to it in his

life; and he died to show that God was determined to inflict its penalty.
(3) The plan of justification by faith leads to an observance of the Law. The sinner sees the evil
of transgression. He sees the respect which God has shown to the Law. He gives his heart to
God, and yields himself to obey his Law. All the sentiments that arise from the conviction of sin;
that flow from gratitude for mercies; that spring from love to God; all his views of the sacredness
of the Law, prompt him to yield obedience to it. The fact that Christ endured such sufferings to
show the evil of violating the Law, is one of the strongest motives prompting to obedience. We
do not easily and readily repeat what overwhelms our best friends in calamity; and we are
brought to hate what inflicted such woes on the Saviour’s soul. The sentiment recorded by Watts
is as true as it is beautiful:
“’Twas for my sins my dearest Lord.
Hung on the cursed tree.
And groan’d away his dying life,
For thee, my soul, for thee.
“O how I hate those lusts of mine.
That crucified my Lord;
Those sins that pierc’d and nail’d his flesh.
Fast to the fatal wood.
“Yes, my Redeemer, they shall die,
My heart hath so decreed;
Nor will I spare the guilty things.
That made my Saviour bleed.”
This is an advantage in moral influence which no cold, abstract law always has over the
human mind. And one of the chief glories of the plan of salvation is, that while it justifies the
sinner, it brings a new set of influences from heaven, more tender and mighty than can be drawn
from any other source, to produce obedience to the Law of God.
(This is indeed a beautiful and just view of the moral influence of the gospel, and especially of
the doctrine of justification by faith alone. It may be questioned, however, whether the apostle in
this place refers chiefly, or even at all, to the sanctifying tendency of his doctrine. This he does
very fully in the 6th Rom.; and therefore, if another and consistent sense can be found, we need
not resort to the supposition that he now anticipates what he intended, in a subsequent part of
his epistle, more fully to discuss. In what other way, then, does the apostle’s doctrine establish
the Law? How does he vindicate himself from the charge of making it void? In the preceding
chapter he had pointed out the true ground of pardon in the “righteousness of God.” He had
explained that none could be justified but they who had by faith received it. “Do we then,” he
asks in conclusion,” make void the Law by maintaining thus, that no sinner can be accepted who
does not receive a righteousness commensurate with all its demands?.” “Yea, we establish the
law,” is the obvious answer. Jesus has died to satisfy its claims, and lives to honor its precepts.
Thus, he hath brought in “righteousness,” which, being imputed to them that believe, forms such
a ground of pardon and acceptance, as the Law cannot challenge.
Calvin, in his commentary on the passage, though he does not exclude the idea of
sanctification, yet gives prominence to the view now stated. “When,” says he, “we come to
Christ, the exact righteousness of the Law is first found in him, which also becomes ours by
imputation; in the next place sanctification is acquired,” etc.)

CLARKE, “Do we then make void the law through faith? -
1. By law here we may understand the whole of the Mosaic law, in its rites and ceremonies;
of which Jesus Christ was the subject and the end. All that law had respect to him; and the
doctrine of faith in Christ Jesus, which the Christian religion proclaimed, established the
very claims and demands of that law, by showing that all was accomplished in the passion
and death of Christ, for, without shedding of blood, the law would allow of no remission;
and Jesus was that Lamb of God which was slain from the foundation of the world, in
whose blood we have redemption, even the remission of sins.
2. We may understand, also, the moral law, that which relates to the regulation of the
manners or conduct of men. This law also was established by the doctrine of salvation by
faith; because this faith works by love, and love is the principle of obedience: and
whosoever receives salvation through faith in Christ, receives power to live in holy
obedience to every moral precept; for such are God’s workmanship, created anew in Christ
Jesus, unto good works; in which they find it their duty and their interest incessantly to
live.
1. In the notes on the preceding chapter, I have, in general, followed the plan of Dr. Taylor,
and especially in regard to its dialogue form, but I have often differed much from that very
learned and judicious man, in the application of many words and doctrines. He cannot
allow that the death of Christ should be considered as a price paid down for the salvation
of men and, I confess, I cannot understand the apostle in any other way. Nor can I see the
weight of many of his observations, nor the force of his conclusions, on any other ground
than this, that the passion and death of Christ were an atonement made to Divine justice
in the behalf of man; and that it is through the merit of that great sacrifice that God
forgives sin. Nor can I see any reason why such great stress should be laid on faith, but as
that lays hold on and takes up the sacrifice of Christ as a ransom price for the redemption
of the soul from the thraldom and misery of sin and Satan.
2. This chapter contains a fine and striking synopsis of the whole Christian system. The
wretched state of man is awfully exhibited, from the 10th to the 18th verse; and the plan
of salvation, in the 24th, 25th, and 26th verses. A pious writer calls these the Catechism of
Christian Righteousness. The following points in this catechism are worthy of high
consideration - viz. How is God glorified in us, and we in him? - By his Grace. What does
his grace work in us? - True holiness. Upon what motive? - Because it is pleasing to him.
By whom does he give us salvation? - By Jesus Christ. How has Christ obtained this for us?
- By redeeming us. What price did he give? - His Blood. What does his blood effect? - It
reconciles us to God. How is it applied? - By Faith. Who has given this victim of
reconciliation? - God the Father. Why did he choose these means? - To confound the false
righteousness of the Gentiles; to abolish the Figurative righteousness of the Jews; and to
establish his own. What does this grace of God perform? - It pardons sin and purifies the
heart. For whom is this designed? - For all mankind, both Jews and Gentiles. To whom are
these blessings actually communicated? - To all who repent, turn from their sin, and
believe on the Lord Jesus. Why did not God make known this grand method of salvation
sooner?
1. To make it the more valued:
2. To show his fidelity in the performance of his promises: and,
3. To make known the virtue and efficacy of the blood of Christ, which sanctifies the
present, extends its influence to the past, and continues the availing sacrifice and way of
salvation to all future ages.
3. On considering this glorious scheme of salvation, there is great danger, lest, while we

stand amazed at what was done For us, we neglect what must be done In us. Guilt in the
conscience and sin in the heart ruin the man. Pardon in the conscience and Christ in the
heart save the soul. Christ has done much to save us, and the way of salvation is made
plain; but, unless he justify our conscience from dead works, and purify our hearts from all
sin, his passion and death will profit us nothing. While we boast in Christ Jesus, let us see
that our rejoicing, καυχησις, our boasting, be this, the testimony of our conscience, that in
simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have
our conversation in the world, 2Co_1:12.
4. We must beware of Antinomianism; that is, of supposing that, because Christ has been
obedient unto death, there is no necessity for our obedience to his righteous
commandments. If this were so, the grace of Christ would tend to the destruction of the
law, and not to its establishment. He only is saved from his sins who has the law of God
written in his heart; and he alone has the law written in his heart who lives an innocent,
holy, and useful life. Wherever Christ lives he works: and his work of righteousness will
appear to his servants, and its effect will be quietness and assurance for ever. The life of
God in the soul of man is the principle which saves and preserves eternally.
GILL, “Do we then make void the law through faith?.... Which question is answered by
way of detestatation,
God forbid! and by asserting the contrary,
yea, we establish the law. The law is not made void, neither by the grace nor doctrine of
faith: not by the grace of faith; for that faith is not right which is not attended with works of
righteousness; and those works are not right which do not flow from filth. Such a connection
there is between faith and works; and so much do the one depend upon the other. Moreover,
none but believers are capable of performing good works aright, and they do them, and they
ought to do them: besides, faith, as a grace, looks to Christ, as the end of the law for
righteousness, and therefore do not make it void. Nor is it made void by the doctrine of faith,
and by the particular doctrine of a sinner's justification by faith in Christ's righteousness, which
is here more especially intended; for though it is made void by it, as to any use of it for
justification by the deeds thereof; yet its use in other respects is not set aside, such as to inform
us of the mind and will of God, to discover and convince of sin, to show believers their deformity
and imperfection, to render Christ and his righteousness more valuable, and to be a rule of walk
and conversation to them; and it still remains a cursing and condemning law to Christless
sinners, though justified ones are delivered from it as such: yea, the law is so far from being
made void, that it is established by this doctrine; for by it the perpetuity of it is asserted, the
spirituality of it is acknowledged, the perfect righteousness of it is secured: according to this
doctrine all its demands are answered; whatever it requires it has, such as holiness of nature,
perfect obedience to its precepts, and its full penalty borne: it is placed in the best hands, where
it will ever remain; and a regard to it is enforced under the best influence, by the best of motives,
and from the best of principles. It is indeed abolished as a covenant of works, and in this sense is
made void to believers; and it is done away as to the form of administration of it by Moses; and
it is destroyed as a yoke of bondage; and the people of God are free from the malediction of it,
and condemnation by it, and so from its terror; yet it remains unalterable and unchangeable in
the hands of Christ; the matter of it is always the same, and ever obligatory on believers, who,
though they are freed from the curse of it, are not exempted from obedience to it: wherefore the
law is not made void, so as to be destroyed and abolished in every sense, or to be rendered idle,

inactive, useless, and insignificant; but, on the contrary, is made to stand, is placed on a sure
basis and firm foundation, as the words used signify.
Htarih IsαObjection:
Do we then make void the law through faith? — “Does this doctrine of justification by
faith, then, dissolve the obligation of the law? If so, it cannot be of God. But away with such a
thought, for it does just the reverse.”
God forbid: yea, we establish the law — It will be observed here, that, important as was
this objection, and opening up as it did so noble a field for the illustration of the peculiar glory of
the Gospel, the apostle does no more here than indignantly repel it, intending at a subsequent
stage of his argument (
Rom_6:1-23) to resume and discuss it at length.
Note,
(1). It is a fundamental requisite of all true religion that it tend to humble the sinner and exalt
God; and every system which breeds self-righteousness, or cherishes boasting, bears falsehood
on its face (Rom_3:27, Rom_3:28).
(2). The fitness of the Gospel to be a universal religion, beneath which the guilty of every name
and degree are invited and warranted to take shelter and repose, is a glorious evidence of its
truth (Rom_3:29, Rom_3:30).
(3). The glory of God’s law, in its eternal and immutable obligations, is then only fully
apprehended by the sinner, and then only is it enthroned in the depths of his soul, when,
believing that “He was made sin for him who knew no sin,” he sees himself “made the
righteousness of God in Him” (2Co_5:21). Thus do we not make void the law through faith: yea,
we establish the law.
(4). This chapter, and particularly the latter part of it, “is the proper seat of the Pauline
doctrine of Justification, and the grand proof-passage of the Protestant doctrine of the
Imputation of Christ’s righteousness and of Justification not on account of, but through faith
alone” [Philippi]. To make good this doctrine, and reseat it in the faith and affection of the
Church, was worth all the bloody struggles that it cost our fathers, and it will be the wisdom and
safety, the life and vigor of the churches, to “stand fast in this liberty wherewith Christ hath
made them free, and not be again entangled” - in the very least degree - “with the yoke of
bondage” (Gal_5:1).
bt?(r Isα31.Do we then make, etc. When the law is opposed to faith, the flesh immediately suspects
that there is some contrariety, as though the one were adverse to the other: and this false notion prevails,
especially among those who are imbued with wrong ideas as to the law, and leaving the promises, seek
nothing else through it but the righteousness of works. And on this ACCOUNT, not only Paul, but our Lord
himself, was evil spoken of by the Jews, as though in all his preaching he aimed at the abrogation of the law.
Hence it was that he made this protest, —
“ came not to undo, but to fulfill the law.” (Mat_5:17.)
And this suspicion regards the moral as well as the ceremonial law; for as the gospel has put an end to the
Mosaic ceremonies, it is supposed to have a tendency to destroy the whole dispensation of Moses. And
further, as it sweeps away all the righteousness of works, it is believed to be opposed to all those
testimonies of the law, by which the Lord has declared, that he has thereby prescribed the way of
righteousness and salvation. I therefore take this defense of Paul, not only as to ceremonies, nor as to the

commandments which are called moral, but with regard to the whole law UNIVERSALLY. (128)
For the moral law is in reality CONFIRMED and established through faith in Christ, inasmuch as it was
given for this end — to lead man to Christ by showing him his iniquity; and without this it cannot be fulfilled,
and in vain will it require what ought to be done; nor can it do anything but irritate lust more and more, and
thus finally increase man’ condemnation; but where there is a coming to Christ, there is first found in him the
perfect righteousness of the law, which becomes ours by imputation, and then there is sanctification, by
which our hearts are prepared to keep the law; it is indeed imperfectly done, but there is an aiming at the
work. Similar is the case withceremonies, which indeed cease and vanish away when Christ comes, but they
are in reality CONFIRMED by him; for when they are viewed in themselves they are vain and shadowy
images, and then only do they attain anything real and solid, when their end is regarded. In this then
consists their chief CONFIRMATION, when they have obtained their accomplishment in Christ. Let us
then also bear in mind, so to dispense the gospel that by our mode of teaching the law may be confirmed;
but let it be sustained by no other strength than that of faith in Christ.
(128)
The law here, no doubt means, the law of which mention is made in the preceding verses — the law
by the works of which we cannot be justified — the law that is in this respect opposed to faith. To refer us for
its meanng to Rom_3:20
and 21, as is done by [Stuart
] “ wholly unwarrantable,” and to say that it means the
Old Testament; for this is to separate it from it’ immediate connection without any satisfactory reason.
Besides, such an interpretation obliterates an important doctrine, that faith does not render void, or nullify
the authority, the use and sanctions of the moral law but on the contrary, sustains and confirms them.
Though it does what the law does not, and cannot do, inasmuch as it saves the sinner whom the law
condemns; it yet effects this without relaxing or dishonoring the law, but in a way that renders it, if possible,
more binding, and more honorable, and more illustrious. It only renders the passage more intricate to
include the ceremonial law, (for that has more of faith than of law in it,) to which no reference is made in the
context: but there seems to be no objection to include the law of conscience, as well as the written law; for
faith confirms both, and the word “” is here without the article, though this indeed of itself is not decisive. The
moral law, then, as well as the law of conscience, is what is here intended: for the authority of both is
confirmed and strengthened by faith. — Ed.

PULPIT, “Do we then make law void through faith? God forbid: nay, we establish law. The

question naturally arises after what has been said about justification being χωρὶς νό#ου . Do
we then make out our revealed Law, which we have ACCOUHTED so holy and Divine, to
be valueless? Or. rather, as the question is more generally put ( νό#ον being without the
article, and therefore TRAHSLATED as above), "Do we make of none effect the whole
principle of law, embodied to us in our Divine Law? Regarded erroneously as a principle
of justification, the apostle might have answered. "Yes, we do." But any disparagement of it,
regarded in its true light and as answering its real purpose, he meets with an indignant #ὴ
γένοιτο . On the contrary, he says, we establish it. Law means the declaration of righteousness,
and requirement of conformity to it on the part of man. We establish this principle by our
doctrine of the necessity of atonement for man's defect. We put law on its true base, and so
make it the more to stand ( ἰστάνο#εν ) by showing its office to be, not to justify—
a POSITIOH Rom_7:12,
etc.; Gal_3:24). In pursuance of this thought, the apostle, in the next chapter, shows that in
the Old Testament itself it is faith, and not law, which is regarded as justifying; as, in the first
place and notably, in the case of Abraham; thus proving the previous assertion
in Rom_3:21, Μαρτυρου#ένη ὑπὸ τοῦ νό#ου καὶ τῶν προφητῶν . In Rom_7:1^25. he treats
the SUBJECT subjectively, analyzing the operation of law in the human soul, and so
bringing out still more clearly its true meaning and purpose.

gktWsedvdoaeh 9v4FAITH ESTABLISHES THE LAW
Rom_3:31. Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
A GENERAL prejudice obtains against the way of salvation by faith: but it prevailed equally even in the
apostolic age. Paul himself saw that his statement of the Gospel did not escape censure. He perceived that
it was deemed injurious to the interests of morality; he therefore anticipated and answered this objection.
To bring the SUBJECT fully before you, I will propose for your consideration three things—the objection
made—the objection obviated—the objection retorted.
I. The objection made—
People suppose we make void the law through faith; but the truth, however clearly we may state it is, for the
most part, misapprehended. In explaining salvation by faith we affirm two things concerning the law:
1. That it has no power either to condemn or to justify a believer—
[It cannot condemn
him, because Christ has redeemed him from its curse [Note: Gal_3:13.]. It
cannot justify
him, because he has transgressed it, and its demands of perfect obedience are unalterably
the same. Faith in Christ delivers him from the penal sanctions of the law, but does not in any respect lower
its demands.]
2. That his obedience to it makes no part of his justifying righteousness—
[Faith and works, as grounds of justification, are opposite to each other [Note: Rom_11:6.]. If our works had
any share in our justification we should have a ground of boasting; which is utterly to be excluded
[Note: Rom_3:27.]. The smallest reliance on our works makes void all hope by the Gospel
[Note: Gal_5:2; Gal_5:4.]. All dependence therefore on the works of the law must be entirely renounced.]
These affirmations evidently exclude morality from the office of justifying. They are therefore supposed to
discountenance all practical religion; but this mistake originates in the ignorance of the objectors
themselves.
This will be seen, whilst we notice,
II. The objection obviated—
The believer, so far from making void the law, establishes it. The power of the law is twofold; to command
obedience, and to condemn for disobedience. The believer establishes the law in each of these respects:

1. In its commanding power:
[He owns its absolute authority over him as God’s creature; all his hope is in the perfect obedience which
Christ paid to it for him; he looks upon his obligations to obey it as increased, rather than vacated, by the
death of Christ; he actually desires to obey it as much as if he were to be justified by his obedience to it.]
2. In its condemning power:
[He acknowledges himself justly condemned by it: he founds his hope in Christ as having borne its curse for
him: his own conscience cannot be pacified but by that atonement which satisfied the demands of the law:
bereft of a hope in the atonement, he would utterly despair: he flees to Christ CONTINUALLY “to bear the
iniquity of his holiest actions.”]
Thus he magnifies the law, while the objector himself, as I will now prove, makes it void.
To see this more fully, consider,
III. The objection retorted—
The person who objects to salvation by faith alone, is in reality the one who makes void the law. Objections
against the doctrine of faith are raised from a pretended regard for the law; but the person who blends faith
and works effectually undermines the whole authority of the law. He undermines,
1. Its commanding power—
[He is striving to do something which may serve in part as a ground of his justification; but he can do nothing
which is not imperfect; therefore he shews that he considers the law as less rigorous in its demands than it
really is: consequently he robs it in a measure of its commanding power.]
2. Its condemning power—
[He never thoroughly feels himself a lost sinner; he does not freely acknowledge that he might he justly
cursed even for his most holy actions; he even looks for justification on ACCOUNT of that which in itself
deserves nothing but condemnation: and what is this but to lower its condemning power?]
Thus the advocates for the law are, in fact, its greatest enemies; whereas the advocates for the Gospel are
the truest friends to the law also—

Infer—
1. How absurd is it for persons to decide on religion without ever having studied its doctrines!
[In human sciences men forbear to lay down their dogmas without some previous knowledge of the points
on which they decide; but in theology, all, however ignorant, think themselves competent to judge. They
indeed, who are taught of God, can judge; but unenlightened reason does not qualify us to determine. Let us
beware of indulging prejudices against the truth. Let us seek to be “guided into all truth by the Holy Spirit.”]
2. How excellent is the salvation revealed to us in the Gospel!
[Salvation by faith is exactly suited to man’s necessities. It is also admirably CALCULATED to advance
the honour of God. Every man that is saved magnifies the law, and consequently the lawgiver.
The commanding and condemning power
of the law are equally glorified by the sinner’s dependence on the
obedience and sufferings of Christ: but in those who are condemned, its sanctions only
are honoured. Thus
is the law more honoured in the salvation of one, than in the destruction of the whole human race. Let all
then admire and embrace this glorious salvation.]
iylWmnh IsαV;,.sg;,sν,SC,A,jsCwsvFpMg,FsC.gpsg;,s?prd's family, his relationship to old Adam and the law
ceases at once; but then he is under a new rule, and a new covenant. Believer, you are God's child; it is your
first duty to obey your heavenly Father. A servile spirit you have nothing to do with: you are not a slave, but a
child; and now, inasmuch as you are a beloved child, you are bound to obey your Father's faintest wish, the
least intimation of His will. Does He bid you fulfil a sacred ordinance? It is at your peril that you neglect it,
for you will be disobeying your Father. Does He command you to seek the image of Jesus? It is not your joy to
do so? Does Jesus tell you, "Be ye perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect"? Then not
because the law commands, but because your Saviour enjoins, you will labour to be perfect in holiness. Does
He bid his saints love one another? Do it, not because the law says, "Love thy neighbour," but because Jesus
says, "If ye love Me, keep My commandments;" and this is the commandment that He has given unto you,
"that ye love one another." Are you told to distribute to the poor? Do it, not because charity is a burden
which you dare not shirk, but because Jesus teaches, "Give to him that asketh of thee." Does the Word say,
"Love God with all your heart"? Look at the commandment and reply, "Ah! commandment, Christ hath
fulfilled thee already..I have no need, therefore, to fulfill thee for my salvation, but I rejoice to yield obedience
to thee because God is my Father now and He has a claim upon me, which I would not dispute." May the
Holy Ghost make your heart obedient to the constraining power of Christ's love, that your prayer may be,
"Make me to go in the path of Thy commandments; for therein do I delight." Grace is the mother and nurse
of holiness, and not the apologist of sin.
WESLEY, “1. St. Paul, having the beginning of this Epistle laid down his general proposition, namely, that
"the gospel of Christ is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth;" .. the powerful means,
whereby God makes every believer a partaker of present and eternal salvation; .. goes on to show, that there
is no other way under heaven whereby men can be saved. He speaks particularly of salvation from the guilt of
sin, which he commonly terms justification. And that all men stood in need of this, that none could plead their
own innocence, he proves at large by various arguments, addressed to the Jews as well as the Heathens.
Hence he infers, (in the 19th verse of this chapter,) "that every mouth," whether of Jew or Heathen, must be

"stopped" from excusing or justifying himself, "and all the world become guilty before God." "Therefore,"
saith he, by his own obedience, "by the words of the law, shall no flesh be justified in his sight." "But now the
righteousness of God without the law," .. without our previous obedience thereto, .. "is manifested;" "even
the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ, unto all and upon all that believe:" "For there is
no difference," .. as to their need of justification, or the manner wherein they attain it; .. "for all have sinned,
and come short of the glory of God; .. "the glorious image of God wherein they were created: And all (who
attain) "are justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ, whom God hath set
forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood; that he might be just, and yet the justifier of him which
believeth in Jesus; .. "that without any impeachment to his justice, he might show him mercy for the sake of
that propitiation. "Therefore we conclude," (which was the grand position he had undertaken to establish,)
"that a man is justified by faith, without the works of the law." (Verses 20.28.)
2. It was easy to foresee an objection which might be made, and which has in fact been made in all ages;
namely, that to say we are justified without the works of the law, is to abolish the law. The Apostle, without
entering into a formal dispute, simply denies the charge. "Do we then," says he, "make void the law through
faith? God forbid! Yea, we establish the law."
3. The strange imagination of some, that St. Paul, when he says, "A man is justified without the works of the
law," means only ceremonial law, is abundantly confuted by these very words. For did St. Paul establish the
ceremonial law? It is evident he did not. He did make void that law through faith, and openly avowed his
doing so. It was the moral law only, of which he might truly say, We do not make void, but establish this
through faith.
4. But all men are not herein of his mind. Many there are who will not agree to this. Many in all ages of the
Church, even among those who bore the name of Christians, have contended, that "the faith once delivered to
the saints" was designed to make void the whole law. They would no more spare the moral than the
ceremonial law, but were for "hewing," as it were, "both in pieces before the Lord; "vehemently maintaining,
"If you establish any law, Christ shall profit you nothing; Christ is become of no effect to you; ye are fallen
from grace."
5. But is the zeal of these men according to knowledge? Have they observed the connexion between the law
and faith? and that, considering the close connexion between them, to destroy one is indeed to destroy both?
.. that, to abolish the moral law, is, in truth, to abolish faith and the law together? as leaving no proper
means, either of bringing us to faith, or of stirring up that gift of God in our soul.
6. It therefore behoves all who desire either to come to Christ, or to walk in him whom they have received, to
take heed how they "make void the law through faith;" to secure us effectually against which, let us inquire,
First, Which are the most usual ways of making "void the law through faith?" And, Secondly, how we may
follow the Apostle, and by faith "establish the law."
I. 1. Let us, First, inquire, Which are the most usual ways of making void the law through faith? ow the way
for a Preacher to make it all void at a stroke, is, not to preach it at all. This is just the same thing as to blot it
out of the oracles of God. More especially, when it is done with design; when it is made a rule, not to preach
the law; and the very phrase, "a Preacher of the law," is used as a term of reproach, as though it meant little
less than an enemy of the gospel.
2. All this proceeds from the deepest ignorance of the nature, properties, and use of the law; and proves, that
those who act thus, either know not Christ, .. are utter strangers to living faith, .. or, at least, that they are
but babes in Christ, and, as such, "unskilled in the word of righteousness."
3. Their grand plea is this: That preaching the gospel, that is, according to their judgment, the speaking of
nothing but the sufferings and merits of Christ, answers all the ends of the law. But this we utterly deny. It
does not answer the very first end of the law, namely, the convincing men of sin; The awakening those who
are still asleep on the brink of hell. There may have been here and there an exempt case. One in a thousand
may have been awakened by the gospel: But this is no general rule: The ordinary method of God is, to convict
sinners by the law, and that only. The gospel is not the means which God hath ordained, or which our Lord

himself used, for this end. We have no authority in Scripture for applying it thus, nor any ground to think it
will prove effectual. or have we any more ground to expect this, from the nature of the thing. "They that be
whole," as our Lord himself observes, "need not a physician, but they that are sick." It is absurd, therefore,
to offer a physician to them that are whole, or that at least imagine themselves so to be. You are first to
convince them that they are sick; otherwise they will not thank you for your labour. It is equally absurd to
offer Christ to them whose heart is whole, having never yet been broken. It is, in the proper sense, "casting
pearls before swine." Doubtless "they will trample them under foot;" and it is no more than you have reason
to expect, if they also "turn again and rend you."
4. "But although there is no command in Scripture, to offer Christ to the careless sinner, yet are there not
scriptural precedents for it?" I think not: I know not any. I believe you cannot produce one, either from the
four Evangelists, or the Acts of the Apostles. either can you prove this to have been the practice of any of the
Apostles, from any passage in all their writings.
5. "ay, does not the Apostle Paul say, in his former Epistle to the Corinthians, `We preach Christ crucified?'
(1:23,) and in his latter, `We preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord?' (4:5.)"
We consent to rest the cause on this issue; to tread in his steps, to follow his example. Only preach you just as
Paul preached, and the dispute is at an end.
For although we are certain he preached Christ in as perfect a manner as the very chief of the Apostle, yet
who preached the law more than St. Paul? Therefore he did not think the gospel answered the same end.
6. The very first sermon of St. Paul's which is recorded, concludes in these words: "By him all that believe are
justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses. Beware therefore, lest that
come upon you which is spoken of in the Prophets; Behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish: For I work
a work in your days, a work which you will in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto you." (Acts 13:39,
40.) ow it is manifest, all this is preaching the law, in the sense wherein you understand the term; even
although great part of, if not all, his hearers, were either Jews or religious proselytes, (verse 43.) and,
therefore, probably many of them, in some degree at least, convicted of sin already. He first reminds them,
that they could not be justified by the law of Moses, but only by faith in Christ; and then severely threatens
them with the judgments of God, which is in the strongest sense, preaching the law.
7. In his next discourse, that to the Heathens at Lystra, (14:15ff.) we do not find so much as the name of
Christ: The whole purport of it is, that they should "turn from those vain idols, unto the living God." ow
confess the truth. Do not you think, if you had been there, you could have preached much better than he? I
should not wonder if you thought too, that his preaching so ill occasioned his being so ill treated; and that his
being stoned was a just judgment upon him for not preaching Christ!
8. To the gaoler indeed, when "he sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, and
said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" he immediately said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ;" (Acts 16:29,
30;) and in the case of one so deeply convicted of sin, who would not have said the same? But to the men of
Athens you find him speaking in a quite different manner; reproving their superstition, ignorance, and
idolatry; and strongly moving them to repent, from the consideration of a future judgment, and of the
resurrection from the dead. (17:24.31.) Likewise when Felix sent for Paul, on purpose that he might "hear
him concerning the faith in Christ;" instead of preaching Christ in your sense, (which would probably have
caused the Governor either to mock or to contradict and blaspheme,) "he reasoned of righteousness,
temperance, and judgment to come," till Felix (hardened as he was) "trembled." (24:24, 25.) Go thou, and
tread in his steps. Preach Christ to the careless sinner, by reasoning "of righteousness, temperance, and
judgment to come!"
9. If you say, "But he preached Christ in a different manner in his Epistles:" I answer, (1.) He did not there
preach at all; not in that sense wherein we speak: For preaching, in our present question, means speaking
before a congregation. But, waving this, I answer, (2.) His Epistles are directed, not to unbelievers, such as
those we are now speaking of, but "to the saints of God," in Rome, Corinth, Philippi, and other places. ow,
unquestionably, he would speak more of Christ to these than to those who were without God in the world.

And yet, (3.) Every one of these is full of the law, even the Epistles to the Romans and the Galatians; in both
of which he does what you term "preaching the law," and that to believers, as well as unbelievers.
10. From hence it is plain, you know not what it is to preach Christ, in the sense of the Apostle. For doubtless
St. Paul judged himself to be preaching Christ, both to Felix, and at Antioch, Lystra, and Athens: From whose
example every thinking man must infer, that not only the declaring the love of Christ to sinners, but also the
declaring that he will come from heaven in flaming fire, is, in the Apostle's sense, preaching Christ; yea, in the
full scriptural meaning of the word. To preach Christ, is to preach what he hath revealed, either in the Old or
ew Testament; so that you are really preaching Christ, when you are saying, "The wicked shall be turned
into hell, and all the people that forget God," as when you are saying, "Behold the Lamb of God, which
taketh away the sin of the world!"
11. Consider this well; .. that to preach Christ, is to preach all things that Christ hath spoken; all his
promises; all his threatenings and commands; all that is written in his book; and then you will know how to
preach Christ, without making void the law.
12. "But does not the greatest blessing attend those discourses wherein we peculiarly preach the merits and
suffering of Christ?"
Probably when we preach to a congregation of mourners, or of believers, these will be attended with the
greatest blessing; because such discourses are peculiarly suited to their state. At least, these will usually
convey the most comfort. But this is not always the greatest blessing. I may sometimes receive a far greater by
a discourse that cuts me to the heart, and humbles me to the dust. either should I receive that comfort, if I
were to preach or to hear no discourses but on the sufferings of Christ. These, by constant repetition, would
lose their force, and grow more and more flat and dead, till at length they would become a dull round of
words, without any spirit, or life, or virtue. So that thus to preach Christ must, in process of time, make void
the gospel as well as the law.
II. 1. A Second way of making void the law through faith is, the teaching that faith supersedes the necessity of
holiness. This divides itself into a thousand smaller paths, and many there are that walk therein. Indeed there
are few that wholly escape it; few who are convinced, we are saved by faith, but are sooner or later, more or
less, drawn aside into this by.way.
2. All those are drawn into this by.way who, if it be not settled judgment that faith in Christ entirely sets aside
the necessity of keeping his law; yet suppose either sets aside the necessity of keeping his law; yet suppose
either, (1.) That holiness is less necessary now than it was before Christ came; or, (2.) That a less degree of it is
necessary; or, (3.) That it is less necessary to believers than to others. Yea, and so are all those who, although
their judgment be right in the general, yet think they may take more liberty in particular cases than they
could have done before they believed. Indeed, the using the term liberty, in such a manner, for liberty from
obedience or holiness, shows at once, that their judgment is perverted, and that they are guilty of what they
imagined to be far from them; namely, of making void the law through faith, by supposing faith to supersede
holiness.
3. The first plea of those who teach this expressly is, that we are now under the covenant of grace, not works;
and therefore we are no longer under the necessity of performing the works of the law.
And who ever was under the covenant of works? one but Adam before the fall. He was fully and properly
under that covenant which required perfect, universal obedience, as the one condition of acceptance; and left
no place for pardon, upon the very least transgression. But no man else was ever under this, neither Jew nor
Gentile; neither before Christ nor since. All his sons were and are under the covenant of grace. The manner of
their acceptance is this: The free grace of God, through the merits of Christ, gives pardon to them that
believe; that believe with such a faith as, working by love, produces all obedience and holiness.
4. The case is not, therefore, as you suppose, that men were once more obliged to obey God, or to work the
works of his law, than they are now. This is a supposition you cannot make good. But we should have been
obliged, if we had been under the covenant of works, to have done those works antecedent to our acceptance.

Whereas now all good works, though as necessary as ever, are not antecedent to our acceptance, but
consequent upon it. Therefore the nature of the covenant of grace gives you no ground, no encouragement at
all, to set aside any insistence or degree of obedience; any part or measure of holiness.
5. "But are we not justified by faith, without the works of the law?" Undoubtedly we are; without the works
either of the ceremonial or the moral law. And would to God all men were convicted of this! It would prevent
innumerable evils; Antinomianism in particular: For generally speaking, they are the Pharisees who make the
Antinomians. Running into an extreme so palpably contrary to Scripture, they occasion others to run into the
opposite one. These, seeking to be justified by works, affright those from allowing any place for them.
6. But the truth lies between both. We are, doubtless, justified by faith. This is the corner.stone of the whole
Christian building. We are justified without the works of the law, as any previous condition of justification;
but they are an immediate fruit of that faith whereby we are justified. So that if good works do not follow our
faith, even all inward and outward holiness, it is plain our faith is nothing worth; we are yet in our sins.
Therefore, that we are justified by faith, even by our faith without works, is no ground for making void the
law through faith; or for imagining that faith is a dispensation from any kind or degree of holiness.
7. "ay, but does not St. Paul expressly say, `Unto him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth
the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness?' And does it not follow from hence, that faith is to a
believer in the room, in the place, of righteousness? But if faith is in the room of righteousness or holiness,
what need is there of this too?"
This, it must be acknowledged, comes home to the point, and is, indeed, the main pillar of Antinomianism.
And yet it needs not a long or laboured answer. We allow, (1.) That God justifies the ungodly; him that, till
that hour, is totally ungodly; .. full of all evil, void of all good: (2.) That he justifies the ungodly that worketh
not; that, till that moment, worketh no good work; .. neither can he; for an evil tree cannot bring forth good
fruit: (3.) That he justifies him by faith alone, without any goodness or righteousness preceding: And, (4.)
That faith is then counted to him for righteousness; namely, for preceding righteousness; that is, God,
through the merits of Christ, accepts him that believes, as if he had already fulfilled all righteousness. But
what is all this to your point? The Apostle does not say, either here or elsewhere, that this faith is counted to
him for subsequent righteousness. He does teach that there is no righteousness before faith; but where does he
teach that there is none after it? He does assert, holiness cannot precede justification; but not, that it need not
follow it. St. Paul, therefore, gives you no colour for making void the law, by teaching that faith supersedes
the necessity of holiness.
III. 1. There is yet another way of making void the law through faith, which is more common than either of
the former. And that is, the doing it practically; the making it void in fact, though not in principle; the living
as if faith was designed to excuse us from holiness.
How earnestly does the Apostle guard us against this, in those well.known words: "What then? Shall we sin,
because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid:" (Rom. 6:15:) A caution which it is needful
thoroughly to consider, because it is of the last importance.
2. The being "under the law," may here mean, (1.) The being obliged to observe the ceremonial law: (2.) The
being obliged to conform to the whole Mosaic institution: (3.) The being obliged to keep the whole moral law,
as the condition of our acceptance with God: And, (4.) The being under the wrath and curse of God; under
sentence of eternal death; under a sense of guilt and condemnation, full of horror and slavish fear.
3. ow although a believer is "not without law to God, but under the law to Christ," yet from the moment he
believes, he is not "under the law," in any of the preceding senses. On the contrary, he is "under grace,"
under a more benign, gracious dispensation. As he is no longer under the ceremonial law, nor under the
Mosaic institution; as he is not obliged to keep even the moral law, as the condition of his acceptance; so he is
delivered from the wrath and the curse of God, from all sense of guilt and condemnation, and from all that
horror and fear of death and hell whereby he was all his life before subject to bondage. And he now performs
(which while "under the law" he could not do) a willing and universal obedience. He obeys not from the
motive of slavish fear, but on a nobler principle; namely, the grace of God ruling in his heart, and causing all

his works to be wrought in love.
4. What then? Shall this evangelical principle of action be less powerful that the legal? Shall we be less
obedient to God from filial love than we were from servile fear?
It is well if this is not a common case; if this practical Antinomianism, this unobserved way of making void
the law through faith, has not infected thousands of believers.
Has it not infected you? Examine yourself honestly and closely. Do you not do now what you durst not have
done when you was "under the law," or (as we commonly call it) under conviction? For instance: You durst
not then indulge yourself in food: You took just what was needful, and that of the cheapest kind. Do you not
allow yourself more latitude now? Do you not indulge yourself a little more than you did? O beware lest you
"sin because you are not under the law, but under grace!"
5. When you was under conviction, you durst not indulge the lust of the eye in any degree. You would not do
anything, great or small, merely to gratify your curiosity. You regarded only cleanliness and necessity, or at
most very moderate convenience, either in furniture or apparel; superfluity and finery of whatever kind, as
well as fashionable elegance, were both a terror and an abomination to you.
Are they so still? Is your conscience as tender now in these things as it was then? Do you still follow the same
rule both in furniture and apparel, trampling all finer, all superfluity, every thing useless, every thing merely
ornamental, however fashionable, underfoot? Rather, have you not resumed what you had once laid aside,
and what you could not then use without wounding you conscience? And have you not learned to say, "O, I
am not so scrupulous now?" I would to God you were! Then you would not sin thus, "because you are not
under the law, but under grace!"
6. You was once scrupulous too of commending any to their face; and still more, of suffering any to commend
you. It was a stab to your heart; you could not bear it; you sought the honour that cometh of God only. You
could not endure such conversation; nor any conversation which was not good to the use of edifying. All idle
talk, all trifling discourse, you abhorred; you hated as well as feared it; being deeply sensible of the value of
time, of every precious, fleeting moment. In like manner, you dreaded and abhorred idle expense; valuing
your money only less than your time, and trembling lest you should be found an unfaithful steward even of
the mammon of unrighteousness.
Do you now look upon praise as deadly poison, which you can neither give nor receive but at the peril of your
soul? Do you still dread and abhor all conversation which does not tend to the use of edifying; and labour to
improve every moment, that it may not pass without leaving you better than it found you? Are not you less
careful as to the expense both of money and time? Cannot you now lay out either, as you could not have done
once? Alas! how has that "which should have been for your health, proved to you an occasion of falling!"
How have you "sinned because you was not under the law, but under grace!"
7. God forbid you should any longer continue thus to "turn the grace of God into lasciviousness!" O
remember how clear and strong a conviction you once had concerning all these things! And, at the same time,
you was fully satisfied from whom that conviction came. The world told you, you was in a delusion; but you
knew it was the voice of God. In these things you was not too scrupulous then; but you are not now
scrupulous enough. God kept you longer in that painful school, that you might learn those great lessons the
more perfectly. And have you forgot them already? O recollect them before it is too late! Have you suffered so
many things in vain? I trust, it is not yet in vain. ow use the conviction without the pain! Practice the lesson
without the rod! Let not the mercy of God weigh less with you now, than his fiery indignation did before. Is
love a less powerful motive than fear? If not, let it be an invariable rule, "I will do nothing now I am `under
grace,' which I durst not have done when 'under the law.'"
8. I cannot conclude this head without exhorting you to examine yourself, likewise, touching sins of omission.
Are you as clear of these, now you "are under grace," as you was when "under the law?" How diligent was
you then in hearing the word of God! Did you neglect any opportunity? Did you not attend thereon day and
night? Would a small hinderance have kept you away? a little business? a visitant? a slight indisposition? a

soft bed? a dark or cold morning? .. Did not you then fast often; or use abstinence to the uttermost of your
power? Was not you much in prayer, (cold and heavy as you was,) while you was hanging over the mouth of
hell? Did you not speak and not spare even for and unknown God? Did you not boldly plead his cause? ..
reprove sinners? .. and avow the truth before an adulterous generation? And are you now a believer in
Christ? Have you the faith that overcometh the world? What! and are less zealous for your Master now, than
you was when you knew him not? less diligent in fasting, in prayer, in hearing his word, in calling sinners to
God? O repent! See and feel your grievous loss! Remember from whence you are fallen! Bewail your
unfaithfulness! ow be zealous and do the first works; lest, if you continue to "make void the law through
faith," God cut you off, and appoint you your portion with the unbelievers!
Discourse 2
"Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid! Yea, we establish the law." Rom. 3:31.
1. It has been shown in the preceding discourse, which are the most usual ways of making void the law
through faith; namely, First, the not preaching it at all; which effectually makes it all void a stroke; and this
under colour of preaching Christ and magnifying the gospel though it be, in truth, destroying both the one
and the other: Secondly, the teaching (whether directly or directly,) that faith supersedes the necessity of
holiness; that this less necessary now, or a less degree of it necessary, than before Christ came; that it is less
necessary to us, because we believe, than otherwise it would have been; or, that Christian liberty is a liberty
from any kind or degree of holiness: (So perverting those great truths, that we are now under the covenant of
grace, and not of works; that a man is justified by faith, without the works of the law; and that "to him that
worketh not, but believeth, his faith is counted for righteousness:") Or, Thirdly, the doing this practically; the
making void the law in practice, though not in principle; the living or acting as if faith was designed to excuse
us from holiness; the allowing ourselves in sin, "because we are not under the law, but under grace." It
remains to inquire how we may follow a better pattern, how we may be able to say, with the Apostle, "Do we
then make void the law through faith? God forbid: Yea, we establish the law."
2. We do not, indeed, establish the old ceremonial law; we know that is abolished for ever. Much less do we
establish the whole Mosaic dispensation; this we know our Lord has nailed to his cross. or yet do we so
establish the moral law, (which, it is to be feared too many do,) as if the fulfilling it, the keeping all the
commandments, were the condition of our justification: If it were so, surely "in His sight should no man
living be justified." But all this being allowed, we still, in the Apostle's sense, "establish the law," the moral
law.
I. 1. We establish the law, First, by our doctrine; by endeavouring to preach it in its whole extent, to explain
and enforce every part of it, in the same manner as our great Teacher did while upon earth. We establish it by
following St. Peter's advice: "If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God;" as the holy men of old,
moved by the Holy Ghost, spoke and wrote for our instruction; and as the Apostles of our blessed Lord, by
the direction of the same Spirit. We establish it whenever we speak in his name, by keeping back nothing from
them that hear; by declaring to them, without any limitation or reserve, the whole counsel of God. And in
order the more effectually to establish it, we use herein great plainness of speech. "We are not as many that
corrupt the word of God;" .kapEleuontes_, (as artful men their bad wines;) we do not cauponize, mix,
adulterate, or soften it, to make it suit the taste of the hearers: .. "But as of sincerity, but as of God, in the
sight of God, speak we in Christ;" as having no other aim, than "by manifestation of the truth to commend
ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God."
2. We then, by our doctrine, establish the law, when we thus openly declare it to all men; and that in the
fullness wherein it is delivered by our blessed Lord and his Apostles; when we publish it in the height, and
depth, and length, and breadth thereof. We then establish the law, when we declare every part of it, every
commandment contained therein, not only in its full, literal sense, but likewise in its spiritual meaning; not
only with regard to the outward actions, which it either forbids or enjoins, but also with respect to the inward
principle, to the thoughts, desires, and intents of the heart.
3. And indeed this we do the more diligently, not only because it is of the deepest importance; .. inasmuch as
all the fruit, every word and work, must be only evil continually, if the tree be evil, if the dispositions and
tempers of the heart be not right before God; .. but likewise because as important as these things are, they

are little considered or understood, .. so little, that we may truly say of the law, too, when taken in its full
spiritual meaning, it is "a mystery which was hid from ages and generations since the world began." It was
utterly hid from the heathen world. They, with all their boasted wisdom, neither found out God, nor the law
of God; not in the letter, much less in the spirit of it. "Their foolish hearts were" more and more "darkened;"
while "professing themselves wise, they became fools." And it was almost equally hid, as to its spiritual
meaning, from the bulk of the Jewish nation. Even these, who were so ready to declare concerning others,
"this people that know not the law are cursed," pronounced their own sentence therein, as being under the
same curse, the same dreadful ignorance. Witness our Lord's continual reproof of the wisest among them for
their gross misinterpretations of it. Witness the supposition almost universally received among them, that
they needed only to make clean the outside of the cup; that the paying tithe of mint, anise, and cummin, ..
outward exactness, .. would atone for inward unholiness, for the total neglect both of justice and mercy, of
faith and the love of God. Yea, so absolutely was the spiritual meaning of the law hidden from the wisest of
them, that one of their most eminent Rabbis comments thus on those words of the Psalmist, "If I incline unto
iniquity with my heart, the Lord will not hear me:" "That is," saith he, "if it be only in my heart, if I do not
commit outward wickedness, the Lord will not regard it; he will not punish me unless I proceed to the
outward act!"
4. But alas! the law of God, as to its inward, spiritual meaning, is not hid from the Jews or heathens only, but
even from what is called the Christian world; at least, from a vast majority of them. The spiritual sense of the
commandments of God is still a mystery to these also. or is this observable only in those lands which are
overspread with Romish darkness and ignorance. But this is too sure, that the far greater part, even of those
who are called Reformed Christians are utter strangers at this day to the law of Christ, in the purity and
spirituality of it.
5. Hence it is that to this day, "'the Scribes and Pharisees," the men who have the form but not the power of
religion, and who are generally wise in their own eyes, and righteous in their own conceits, .. "hearing these
things, are offended;" are deeply offended, when we speak of the religion of the heart; and particularly when
we show, that without this, were we to "give all our goods to feed the poor," it would profit us nothing. But
offended they must be; for we cannot but speak the truth as it is in Jesus. It is our part, whether they will
hear, or whether they will forbear, to deliver our own soul. All that is written in the book of God we are to
declare, not as pleasing men, but the Lord. We are to declare, not only all the promises, but all the
threatenings, too, which we find therein. At the same time that we proclaim all the blessings and privileges
which God hath prepared for his children, we are likewise to "teach all the things whatsoever he hath
commanded." And we know that all these have their use; either for the awakening those that sleep, the
instructing the ignorant, the comforting the feeble.minded, or the building up and perfecting of the saints. We
know that "all Scripture, given by inspiration of God is profitable," either "for doctrine," or "for reproof,"
either "for correction or for instruction in righteousness;" and "that the man of God," in the process of the
work of God in his soul, has need of every part thereof, that he may at length "be perfect, throughly
furnished unto all good works."
6. It is our part thus to preach Christ, by preaching all things whatsoever he hath revealed. We may indeed,
without blame, yea, and with a peculiar blessing from God, declare the love of our Lord Jesus Christ; we may
speak, in a more especial manner, of "the Lord our righteousness." We may expatiate upon the grace of God
in Christ, "reconciling the world unto himself;" we may, at proper opportunities, dwell upon his praise, as
"bearing the iniquities of us all, as wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities, that by his
stripes we might be healed:" .. But still we should not preach Christ, according to his word, if we were wholly
to confine ourselves to this: We are not ourselves clear before God, unless we proclaim him in all his offices.
To preach Christ, as a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, is to preach him, not only as our great High
Priest, "taken from among men, and ordained for men, in things pertaining to God;" as such, "reconciling us
to God by his blood," and "ever living to make intercession for us;" .. but likewise as the Prophet of the Lord,
"who of God is made unto us wisdom," who, by his word and his Spirit, is with us always, "guiding us into all
truth;" .. yea, and as remaining a King for ever; as giving laws to all whom he has bought with his blood; as
restoring those to the image of God, whom he had first re.instated in his favour; as reigning in all believing
hearts until he has "subdued all things to himself," .. until he hath utterly cast out all sin, and brought in
everlasting righteousness.

II. 1. We establish the law, Secondly, when we so preach faith in Christ as not to supersede, but produce
holiness; to produce all manner of holiness, negative and positive, of the heart and of the life.
In order to this, we continually declare, (what should be frequently and deeply considered by all "who would
not make void the law through faith,") that faith itself, even Christian faith, the faith of God's elect, the faith
of the operation of God, still is only the handmaid of love. As glorious and honourable as it is, it is not the end
of the commandment. God hath given this honour to love alone: Love is the end of all the commandments of
God. Love is the end, the sole end, of every dispensation of God, from the beginning of the world to the
consummation of all things. And it will endure when heaven and earth flee away; for "love" alone "never
faileth." Faith will totally fail; it will be swallowed up in sight, in the everlasting vision of God. But even then
love, ..
Its nature and its office still the same,
Lasting its lamp and unconsumed its flame, ..
In deathless triumph shall for ever live,
And endless good diffuse, and endless praise receive.
2. Very excellent things are spoken of faith, and whosoever is a partaker thereof may well say with the
Apostle, "Thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift." Yet still it loses all its excellence when brought into a
comparison with love. What St. Paul observes concerning the superior glory of the gospel above that of the
law may with great propriety be spoken of the superior glory of love above that of faith: "Even that which
was made glorious hath no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. For if that which is done
away is glorious, much more doth that which remaineth exceed in glory" Yea, all the glory of faith, before it is
done away, arises hence, that it ministers to love: It is the great temporary means which God has ordained to
promote that eternal end.
3. Let those who magnify faith beyond all proportion, so as to swallow up all things else, and who so totally
misapprehend the nature of it as to imagine it stands in the place of love, consider farther, that as love will
exist after faith, so it did exist long before it. The angels who, from the moment of their creation, beheld the
face of their Father that is in heaven, had no occasion for faith, in its general notion, as it is the evidence of
things not seen. either had they need of faith in its more particular acceptation, faith in the blood of Jesus:
for he took not upon him the nature of angels, but only the seed of Abraham. There was therefore no place
before the foundation of the world for faith either in the general or particular sense. But there was for love.
Love existed from eternity, in God, the great ocean of love. Love had a place in all the children of God, from
the moment of their creation. They received at once from their gracious Creator to exist, and to love.
4. or is it certain (as ingeniously and plausibly as many have descanted upon this) that faith, even in the
general sense of the word, had any place in paradise. It is highly probable, from that short and
uncircumstantial account which we have in Holy Writ, that Adam, before he rebelled against God, walked
with him by sight and not by faith.
For then his reason's eye was strong and clear,
And (as an eagle can behold the sun)
Might have beheld his Maker's face as near,
As the' intellectual angels could have done.
He was then able to talk with him face to face, whose face we cannot now see and live; and consequently had
no need of that faith whose office it is to supply the want of sight.
5. On the other hand, it is absolutely certain, faith, in its particular sense, had then no place. For in that sense
it necessarily presupposes sin, and the wrath of God declared against the sinner; without which there is no
need of an atonement for sin in order to the sinner's reconciliation with God. Consequently, as there was no
need of an atonement before the fall, so there was no place for faith in that atonement; man being then pure
from every stain of sin; holy as God is holy. But love even then filled his heart; it reigned in him without rival;
and it was only when love was lost by sin, that faith was added, not for its own sake, nor with any design that
it should exist any longer than until it had answered the end for which it was ordained, .. namely, to restore

man to the love from which he was fallen. At the fall, therefore, was added this evidence of things unseen,
which before was utterly needless; this confidence in redeeming love, which could not possibly have any place
till the promise was made, that "the Seed of the woman should bruise the serpent's head."
6. Faith, then, was originally designed of God to re.establish the law of love. Therefore, in speaking thus, we
are not undervaluing it, or robbing it of its due praise; but on the contrary showing its real worth, exalting it
in its just proportion, and giving it that very place which the wisdom of God assigned it from the beginning. It
is the grand means of restoring that holy love wherein man was originally created. It follows, that although
faith is of no value in itself, (as neither is any other means whatsoever,) yet as it leads to that end, the
establishing anew the law of love in our hearts; and as, in the present state of things, it is the only means
under heaven for effecting it; it is on that account an unspeakable blessing to man, and of unspeakable value
before God.
III. 1. And this naturally brings us to observe, Thirdly, the most important way of establishing the law;
namely, the establishing it in our own hearts and lives. Indeed, without this, what would all the rest avail? We
might establish it by our doctrine; we might preach it in its whole extent; might explain and enforce every
part of it. We might open it in its most spiritual meaning, and declare the mysteries of the kingdom; we might
preach Christ in all his offices, and faith in Christ as opening all the treasures of his love; and yet, all this
time, if the law we preached were not established in our hearts, we should be of no more account before God
than "sounding brass, or tinkling cymbals:" All our preaching would be so far from profiting ourselves, that
it would only increase our damnation.
2. This is, therefore, the main point to be considered, How may we establish the law in our own hearts so that
it may have its full influence on our lives? And this can only be done by faith.
Faith alone it is which effectually answers this end, as we learn from daily experience. For so long as we walk
by faith, not by sight, we go swiftly on in the way of holiness. While we steadily look, not at the things which
are seen, but at those which are not seen, we are more and more crucified to the world and the world
crucified to us. Let but the eye of the soul be constantly fixed, not on the things which are temporal, but on
those which are eternal, and our affections are more and more loosened from earth, and fixed on things
above. So that faith, in general, is the most direct and effectual means of promoting all righteousness and true
holiness; of establishing the holy and spiritual law in the hearts of them that believe.
3. And by faith, taken in its more particular meaning, for a confidence in a pardoning God, we establish his
law in our own hearts in a still more effectual manner. For there is no motive which so powerfully inclines us
to love God, as the sense of the love of God in Christ. othing enables us like a piercing conviction of this to
give our hearts to him who was given for us. And from this principle of grateful love to God arises love to our
brother also. either can we avoid loving our neighbour, if we truly believe the love wherewith God hath
loved us. ow this love to man, grounded on faith and love to God, "worketh no ill to" our "neighbour."
Consequently, it is, as the Apostle observes,"the fulfilling of the" whole negative "law." "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 commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, Thou shalt love
thy neighbour as thyself." either is love content with barely working no evil to our neighbour. It continually
incites us to do good, as we have time and opportunity; to do good, in every possible kind, and in every
possible degree, to all men. It is therefore, the fulfilling of the positive, likewise, as well as of the negative, law
of God.
4. or does faith fulfil either the negative or positive law, as to the external part only; but it works inwardly
by love, to the purifying of the heart, the cleansing it from all vile affections. Everyone that hath this faith in
himself, "purifieth himself, even as he is pure;" .. purifieth himself from every earthly, sensual desire, from
all vile and inordinate affections; yea, from the whole of that carnal mind which is enmity against God. At the
same time, if it have its perfect work, it fills him with all goodness, righteousness, and truth. It brings all
heaven into his soul; and causes him to walk in the light, even as God is in the light.
5. Let us thus endeavour to establish the law in ourselves; not sinning "because we are under grace," but
rather using all the power we receive thereby, "to fulfil all righteousness." Calling to mind what light we

received from God while his Spirit was convincing us of sin, let us beware we do not put out that light; what
we had then attained let us hold fast. Let nothing induce us to build again what we have destroyed; to resume
anything, small or great, which we then clearly saw was not for the glory of God, or the profit of our own
soul; or to neglect anything, small or great, which we could not then neglect, without a check from our own
conscience. To increase and perfect the light which we had before, let us now add the light of faith. Confirm
we the former gift of God by a deeper sense of whatever he had then shown us, by a greater tenderness of
conscience, and a more exquisite sensibility of sin. Walking now with joy, and not with fear, in a clear, steady
sight of things eternal, we shall look on pleasure, wealth, praise.all the things of earth, as on bubbles upon the
water; counting nothing important, nothing desirable, nothing worth a deliberate thought, but only what is
"within the veil," where Jesus "sitteth at the right hand of God."
6. Can you say, "Thou art merciful to my unrighteousness; my sins thou rememberest no more?" Then for
the time to come see that you fly from sin, as from the face of a serpent! For how exceeding sinful does it
appear to you now! How heinous above all expression! On the other hand, in how amiable a light do you now
see the holy and perfect will of God! ow, therefore, labour that it may be fulfilled, both in you, by you, and
upon you! ow watch and pray that you may sin no more, that you may see and shun the least transgression
of his law! You see the motes which you could not see before, when the sun shines into a dark place. In like
manner you see the sins which you could not see before, now the Sun of Righteousness shines in your heart.
ow, then, do all diligence to walk, in every respect, according to the light you have received! ow be zealous
to receive more light daily, more of the knowledge and love of God, more of the Spirit of Christ, more of his
life, and of the power of his resurrection! ow use all the knowledge, and love, and life, and power you have
already attained: So shall you continually go on from faith to faith; so shall you daily increase in holy love, till
faith is swallowed up in sight, and the law of love established to all eternity!

Romans 3 commentary

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Tags

Categories

Download

Quick Actions

Statistics

Related Slideshows

Romans 3 commentary

About This Presentation

Slide Content

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 3

Slide 4

Slide 5

Slide 6

Slide 7

Slide 8

Slide 9

Slide 10

Slide 11

Slide 12

Slide 13

Slide 14

Slide 15

Slide 16

Slide 17

Slide 18

Slide 19

Slide 20

Slide 21

Slide 22

Slide 23

Slide 24

Slide 25

Slide 26

Slide 27

Slide 28

Slide 29

Slide 30

Slide 31

Slide 32

Slide 33

Slide 34

Slide 35

Slide 36

Slide 37

Slide 38

Slide 39

Slide 40

Slide 41

Slide 42

Slide 43

Slide 44

Slide 45

Slide 46

Slide 47

Slide 48

Slide 49

Slide 50

Slide 51

Slide 52

Slide 53

Slide 54

Slide 55

Slide 56

Slide 57

Slide 58

Slide 59

Slide 60

Slide 61

Slide 62

Slide 63

Slide 64

Slide 65

Slide 66

Slide 67

Slide 68

Slide 69

Slide 70

Slide 71

Slide 72

Slide 73

Slide 74

Slide 75

Slide 76

Slide 77