Romans 3:1-20

This chapter consists of three parts. The first part extends to the 8th verse inclusively, and is designed to answer and remove some objections to the doctrine previously advanced by the Apostle. In the second part, from the 9th to the 20th verse, it is proved by the testimonies of various Scriptures that the Jews, as well as the Gentiles, are involved in sin and guilt, and consequently that not one can be justified by the law. The third part commences at verse 21, where the Apostle reverts to the declaration, ch. i. 17, with which his discussion commenced, and exhibits the true and only way of justification for all men, by the righteousness of God imputed through faith in Jesus Christ.

V, 1. — What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

If the preceding doctrine be true, it may be asked, what advantage hath the Jew over the Gentile, and what profit is there in circumcision, if it does not save from sin? If, on the contrary, the Jews, on account of their superior privileges, will be more surely condemned before the tribunal of Divine justice, as the Apostle had just shown, it appears obviously improper to allege that God has favoured them above the Gentiles. This objection it was necessary to obviate, not only because it is specious, but because it is important, and might, in regard to the Jews, arrest the course of the gospel. It is specious, for if, in truth, the advantages of the Jews, so far from justifying them, contribute nothing to cause the balance of Divine judgment to preponderate in their favour — if their advantages rather enhance their condemnation, does it not appear that they are not only useless, but positively pernicious? In these advantages, then, it is impossible to repose confidence. But the objection is also important, for it would be difficult to imagine that all that God had done for the Jews, his care of them so peculiar, and his love of them so great — in short, all the privileges which Moses exalts so highly, were lavished on them in vain. The previous statement of the Apostle might therefore be injurious to the doctrine of the gospel, by rendering him more and more odious in the eyes of his countrymen, and therefore he had good reasons for fully meeting and answering this objection. In a similar way it is still asked by carnal professors of Christianity, of what use is obedience to the law of God or the observance of his ordinances, if they do not save the soul, or contribute somewhat to this end 2

V. 2. — Much every way; chiejly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Paul here repels the objection as false and unfounded. Although the privileges of the Jews cannot come into consideration for their justification before the judgment-seat of God, it does not follow that they were as nothing, or of no advantage. On the contrary they were marks of the peculiar care of God for that people, while he had, as it were, abandoned all the other nations. They were as aids, too, which God had given to deliver them from the impiety and depravity of the Gentiles. Finally, the revelation made to them contained not only figures and shadows of the gospel, but also preparations for the new covenant. God had given nothing similar to the Gentiles; the advantage, then, of the Jews was great. Much every way. — This does not mean in every sense, for the Apostle does not retract what he had said in the preceding chapter, namely, that their advantages were of no use for justification to the Jews continuing to be sinners; for, on the contrary, in that case they only enhanced their condemnation. But this expression signifies, that their advantages were very great and very considerable.

Chiefly because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. — The original denotes primarily which is not a priority of order, but a priority of dignity and advantage; that is to say, that of all the advantages which God had vouchsafed to them, the most estimable and most excellent was that of having intrusted to them his oracles. The word here used for oracles signifies the responses or answers given by an oracle, and when the ^criptures are so designated, it implies that they are altogether, in word, as well as in sense, the communications of God. By these oracles we must understand in general all the Scriptures of the Old Testament, especially as they regarded the Messiah, and, in particular, the prophecies which predicted his advent. They were oracles, in respect that they were the words from the mouth of God himself, in opposition to the revelation of nature, which was common to Jews and Gentiles; and they were promises, in respect to their matter, because they contained the great promise of sending Jesus Christ into the world. God had committed these oracles to the Jews; they had been constituted their guardians and depositaries, and through them possessed the high character of the witnesses of God, Isaiah, xliji. 10, xliv. 8, even till the time of their execution, when they were commanded to be communicated to the whole world, according to what Isaiah, ii. 3, had said, — “For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.” These oracles had not, however, been intrusted to them simply as good things for the benefit of others, but also for their own advantage, that they might themselves make use of them; for in these oracles the Messiah was declared as the proper object of their confidence, and through them they had the means of becoming acquainted with the way of salvation.

But why were these oracles given so long before the coming of the Messiah? It was for three principal reasons — ^rs. They were to serve as a testimony that, notwithstanding man’s apostacy, God had not abandoned the earth, but had always reserved for himself a people, and it was by these great and Divine promises that he had preserved his elect in all ages; secondly These oracles were to characterise and designate the Messiah when he should come, in order that he might be known and distinguished; for they pointed him out in such a manner that he could be certainly recognised when he appeared. On this account Philip said to Nathaniel, John, i. 45, “We have found him of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph;“” thirdly They were to serve as a proof of the Divine origin of the

Christian religion, for the admirable correspondence between the Old Testament and the New is a clear and palpable demonstration of its divinity. It is, moreover, to be observed, that this favour of having been constituted the depositaries of the sacred oracles was peculiar to the Jews, and one in which the Gentiles did not at all participate. This is what the Apostle expressly here teaches, since he considers it as an illustrious distinction conferred upon his nation, a pre-eminence over all the kingdoms of the world. But why again does the Apostle account the possession of these oracles their greatest advantage? Might not other privileges have been considered as equal, or even preferable, such as the glorious miracles which God had wrought for the deliverance of the Israelites; his causing them to pass through the Bed Sea, in the face of all the pride and power of their haughty oppressor; his guiding them through the sandy desert by a pillar of fire by night, and of cloud by day; his causing them to hear his voice out of the fire, when he descended in awful majesty upon Sinai; or finally, his giving them his law, written with his own finger, on tables of stone? It is replied, the promises respecting the Messiah, and his coming to redeem men, were much greater than all the others. Apart from these, all the other advantages would not only have been useless, but fatal to the Jews, for, being sinners, they could only have served to overwhelm them with despair, in discovering on the one hand, their corruption, unmitigated by the kindness of Jehovah; and, on the other, the avenging justice of God. In these circumstances they would have been left under the awful impossibility of finding any expiation for their sins. If, then, God had not added’the promises concerning the Messiah, all the rest would have been death to them, and therefore the oracles which contained these promises were the first and chiefest of their privileges.

V. 3. — For what if some did not believe? shall their 7mbeliefmake the faith of God tviihout effect?

Dr Macknight is mistaken in supposing this verse to be the objection of a Jew; and it is not “But what,’’’’ as he translates the first words, it is “For whatr The Apostle answers the objection in stating it.” For what if some have not believed;” that is, “the unbelief of some is no objection to my doctrine.*”” Will their unbelief destroy the faithfulness of God f This repels, and does not, as Dr Macknight understands it, assert the supposition. The meaning is, that the unbelief of the Jews did not destroy God’s faithfulness with respect to the covenant with Abraham. Though the mass of his descendants were unbelievers at this time, yet many of them, both then, as the Apostle asserts, chap. xi. 2, and at all other times, were saved in virtue of that covenant. The faith of God here signifies his faithfulness or veracity. Shall men’s unbelief destroy God’s character for veracity! Paul then anticipates and meets an objection which might be used against his assertion of the pre-eminence of the Jews over the Gentiles, testified by the fact, that to them God had confided his oracles. The objection is this — that since they had not believed in the Messiah whom these oracles promised, this advantage must not only be reckoned of little value, but, on the contrary, prejudicial.

In reply to this objection, the Apostle, in the first place, intimates, that their unbelief had not been universal, which is tacitly understood in his only attributing unbelief to some; for when it is said that some have not believed, it is plainly iv timated that some have believed. It does not indeed appear that it would have been worthy of the Divine wisdom to have given to one nation, in preference to all others, so excellent and glorious an economy as was that of the Old Testament, to have chosen them above all others of his free love and good pleasure, and to have revealed to them the mysteries respecting the Messiah, while, at the same time, none of them should have responded to all this by a true faith. There is too much glory and too much majesty in the person of Jesus Christ, and in his work of redemption, to allow it to be supposed that he should be revealed, even externally, by the word, without profit to some, Isaiah, Iv. 10, 11. In all ages, the gospel has been the ministration of the Spirit, before as well as since the coming of the Messiah, although in a different measure. It was fitting, then, that the ancient promises, which were in substance the gospel, should be accompanied with a measure of that Divine Spirit who imprints them in the hearts of men, and that when the Spirit was to be poured out on all flesh, the nation of the Jews should not be absolutely deprived of this blessing. This was the first answer, namely, that unbelief had not been so general, but that many had profited by the oracles, and consequently, in respect to them at least, the advantage to the Jews had been great. But the Apostle goes farther; for, in the second place, he admits that many had fallen in incredulity, but denies that their incredulity impeached the faithfulness of God.

But it may be said, how could unbelief respecting these oracles be ascribed to the Jews, when they had only rejected the person of Jesus Christ? For they did not doubt the truth of the oracles; on the contrary, they expected with confidence their accomplishment; they only denied that Jesus was the predicted Messiah. It is replied, that to reject as they did the person of Jesus Christ, was the same as if they had formally rejected the oracles themselves, since all that was contained in them could only unite and be accomplished in his person. The Jews, therefore, in reality, rejected the oracles, and so much the more was their guilt aggravated, inasmuch as it was their prejudices, and their carnal and unauthorized anticipations of a temporal Messiah, which caused their rejection of Jesus Christ. Thus it was a real disbelief of the oracles themselves, for all who reject the true meaning of the Scriptures, and attach to them another sense, do in reality disbelieve them, and set up in their stead a phantom of their own imagination, even while they profess to believe the truth of what the Scriptures contain. The Apostle, then, had good reason to attribute unbelief to the Jews respecting the oracles, but he denies that their unbelief can make void the veracity of God.

V. 4. — God forbid: yea, let God be true, but evert, man a liar; as it is written, That thou might est be justified in thy sayings and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

God forbid. — Literally, let it not be, or far be it, a denial frequently made by the Apostle in the same way in this epistle. It intimates two things, namely, the rejecting of that which the objection would infer, not only as what is false, but even impious; for it is an affront to God to make his faithfulness or veracity dependent on the depravity of man, and his favour on our corruption. Though the privileges of the Jew, and the good which God had done for him, terminated only in his condemnation, by reason of his unbelief, it would be derogatory to the Almighty to question his faithfulness, because of the fault of the unprincipled object of these privileges. The Apostle also wished to clear his doctrine from this calumny, that God was not faithful in his promises, and sincere in his proceedings. Let God he true hut every man a liar. — The calling of men, inasmuch as it is of God, is faithful and sincere; but the fact that it produces a result contrary to its nature and tendency, is to be attributed to man, who is always deceitful and vain. If the Jews had not been corrupted by their perversity, their calling would have issued in salvation; if it has turned to their condemnation, this is to be attributed to their own unbelief. We must therefore always distinguish between what comes from God, and, what proceeds from man; that which is from God is good, and right, and true; that which is from man is evil, and false, and deceitful. Mr Tholuck grievously errs in his Neological supposition that this inspired Apostle “utters, in the warmth of his discourse, the wish that all mankind might prove covenant breakers, as this would only tend to glorify God the more, by being the occasion of manifesting how great is his fidelity.“” This would be a bad wish; it would be desiring evil that good might come. It is not a wish. Paul states a truth. God in every instance is to be believed, although this should imply that every man on earth is a liar.

As it is written, that thou mightest he justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. — This passage may be taken either in a passive signification, when thou shalt he judged, or in an active signification, when thou shalt judge. In this latter sense, according to the translation in Psalm, li. 6, the meaning will be clear, if we have recourse to the history referred to in the second book of Samuel, chap. xii. 7, 11, where it is said that Nathan was sent from God to David. In that address, God assumed two characters, the one, of the party complaining and accusing David as an ungrateful man, who had abused the favours he had received, and who had offended his benefactor; the other, of the judge who pronounces in his own cause, according to his own accusation. It is to this David answers, in the fourth verse of the Psalm: “Against thee, thee only have I sinned and done this evil in thy sight, that thou mightest he justified ichen thou speakest;” As if he had said, thou hast good cause to decide against me; I have offended thee; I am ungrateful; thou hast reason to complain and to accuse me; thou hast truth and justice in the words which thy prophet has spoken from thee. He adds, that thou mightest he clear lohen thou

judgest; that is to say, as my accuser thou wilt obtain the victory over me, before thy tribunal,

’ when thou pronouncest thy sentence. In one word, it signifies, that whether in regard to the ground of that sentence or its form, David had nothing to allege against the judgment which God had pronounced in his own cause, and that he acknowledged in the whole the truth and justice of God. Hence, it clearly follows, that when God pleads against us, and when he sets before us the good he has done to us, and, on the other hand, the evil return we have made, it is always found that God is sincere and true towards us, but that we have been deceivers and unbelieving in regard to him, and therefore that our condemnation is just. This is precisely what the Apostle proposed to conclude against the Jews. God had extended to them his favours, and they had requited them only by their sins, and by a base incredulity. When, therefore, he shall bring them to answer before his judgment-seat, God will decide that he had been sincere in respect to them, and that they on the contrary, had been wicked, whence their awful but just condemnation will follow.

The answer of the Apostle will lead to the same conclusion, if the passive sense, thou shalt be judged, be taken. Though so eminent a servant of God, David had been permitted to fall into his foul transgressions, that God might be justified in the declarations of his word, which assert that all men are evil, guilty, and polluted by nature, and that in themselves there is no difference. Had all the eminent saints, whose lives are recorded in Scripture, been preserved blameless, the world would have supposed that such men were an exception to the character given of man in the Word of God. They would have concluded that human nature is better than it is. But when Abraham and Jacob, David and Solomon, and Peter were permitted to manifest what is in human nature, God’s word is justified in what it asserts of man. God “overcomes when he is judged;” that is, such examples as that of the fall of David, prove that man is what God declares him to be. Wicked men bring God to their bar, and accuse him by denying that man is as bad as he says. By such examples God is justified. The passive sense, then, of the word “judge,” is a good and appropriate meaning; and the phrase acquitting, or clearing, or overcoming, is applicable, not to the person who judges God, but to God who is judged. This meaning is also entirely to the Apostle’s purpose. Let all men be accounted liars rather than impugn the veracity of God, because, in reality, all men are in themselves such. Whenever, then, the Divine testimony is contradicted by human testimony, let man be accounted a liar.

V. 5 — But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall ivc say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? f I speak as a man.)

Out of the answer to the question in the first verse of this chapter, another objection might arise, which is here supposed. It is such as a Jew would make, but is proposed by the Apostle himself, as is intimated, when he says I speak as a man, just as any writer is in the habit of stating objections in order to obviate them. The objection is this; If then it be so that the righteousness of God has been made more fully to appear, or is more illustriously manifested from the occasion of the sin of man, shall we not say that it is unjust to punish the sin that has had this effect? What shall we say f — This is a sort of insult against the doctrine of the gospel, as if the objection was so strong and well-founded, that no reply could be made to it. / speak as a man. — That is to say, in the way that the impiety of men, and their want of reverence for God, leads them to speak.

V. 6. — God forbid; for then how shall God judge the world?

Far he it. — Paul thus at once rejects such a consequence, and so perverse a manner of reasoning, as altogether inadmissible, and proceeds to answer it by showing to what it would lead if admitted. For then Jioio shall God judge the world? — If the objection were w3ll-founded it would entirely divest God of the character of judge of the world. The reason of this is manifest, for there is no sin that any man can commit which does not exalt some perfection of God, in the way of contrast. If, then, it be concluded, that because unrighteousness in man illustrates the righteousness of God, God is unrighteous when he taketh vengeance, it must be farther said, that there is no sin that God can justly punish; whence it follows that God cannot any longer be the judge of the world. But this would subvert all order and all religion. The objection then is such that, were it admitted, all the religion in the world would at once be annihilated. But the sin of the world, for which men will be everlastingly punished, will no doubt be made to manifest God’s glory. Such is the force of the Apostle’s reply.

V. 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 9”

This is the same objection as before, stated in other words, by a particular illustration. If

God’s truth and faithfulness be more fully established and made more manifest by the lie of the sinner, that is, by his acting contrary to truth in not receiving but opposing the truth of God, why is he- condemned as a sinner?

V. 8. — And not rather (as we be slanderously, reported, and as some aj/irm that we sai/J, Let us do evil that good may come? whose damnation is just.

This verse may be translated thus: — And why should we not do (as we are slanderously represented, and as some say that we teach, that we should do) evil that good may come? The word do must here be repeated twice, but this is not necessary in the original. The adoption of the wicked maxim, that it is lawful to do evil that good may come, is here shown to be the inevitable consequence of the above perverse manner of reasoning, and a parenthesis is thrown in, which asserts that the Apostle himself was falsely charged with this doctrine. The meaning is, if this good effect of glorifying God is to follow, why may not the evil be done that leads to so desirable a result? This, then, is the objection proposed in the fifth verse carried out to its full length. Paul had already replied to it in substance, in the sixth verse, in a way sufficient to expose both its hollowness and impiety. Now, when it is in nowise altered, but more fully exhibited in all its deformity, and the principle of action to which it leads clearly avowed, no farther answer being necessary, he at once puts it down by a strong unqualified denunciation of the awful punishment it deserves, and which shall fall on those by whom it is maintained. His indignant manner of cutting short the matter was the more proper, since not only was the principle of doing evil that good might come avowed in extenuation of sin and unbelief, but it was even slanderously laid to the charge of himself and his fellow-labourers that he taught this doctrine. It was fitting, then, that an expression of abhorrence, containing a solemn denunciation of the vengeance of Grod, on account of such a complication of perversity and falsehood, should for ever close the subject. The condemnation of persons who held such a maxim is declared to be just, not only because they were calumniators, but likewise because they themselves maintained that wicked principle which they slanderously ascribed to their adversaries. Men often in this manner bring specious reasonings to contradict the decisions of the Divine word; but Christians ought to credit the testimony of God implicitly upon every subject, though many subtile and plausible objections should present themselves which. they are unable to answer.

V. 9 “What then? are we better than they?” No, in nowise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles that they. are all under sin.

After having proposed and replied to the above objections to his doctrine, Paul here resumes the thread of his discourse, by showing that, although he has admitted that the advantages of the Jews over the Gentiles are great, it must not thence be concluded that the Jews are better than the others. What then f Are we better than they f — The common translation here is juster than Mr Stuart’s; which is,” have we any preference f The Jews had a preference. The Apostle allows that they had many advantages, and that they had a preference over the Gentiles, but he denies that in their nature or character they were better. Not at all. — By no means. This is a strong denial of the thing that is the subject of the question. Then he gives the reason of the denial; namely, that he had before charged both Jews and Gentiles as being all under sin. This he had proved in the first and second chapters. All not only signifies that there were sinners among them both, for the Jews did not deny this; on this point there was no difference between them and the Apostle, but he includes all singly, without one exception. It is in this sense of universality that what he has hitherto said, both of

Jews and Gentiles, must be taken. Of all that multitude of men there was not one found who had not wandered from the right way. One alone, Jesus Christ, is without sin, and it is on this account that the Scriptures call him the “Just One!!’’ to distinguish him by the singular character from the rest of men. All are under sin, both in its guilt and condemnation, as well as in its power and pollution. Here this means guilty as being sinners, in the same sense as when it is said. Gal. iii. 22,” The Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.’” It evidently appears that in this sense the expression “under sin,“” must be taken, because in this discussion, being under sin, stands opposed to being under grace, Rom. vi. 14. Now, to be under grace signifies, that we are justified by the mercy of God, who has pardoned our sins. To be under sin, then, signifies to be guilty in the eye of justice. It is in reference to the tribunal of Divine justice, and in the light of condemnation, that Paul has been considering sin, both in respect to Jews and Gentiles, as he afterwards explains himself clearly, at the 19th verse, that every moutJi may he stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

V. 10, — As it is written, There is none righteous, no not one.

After having proceeded in his discussion, appealing to the natural sentiments of conscience and undeniable fact, Paul now employs the authority of Scripture, and alleges several passages drawn from the books of the Old Testament, written at different times, in order more clearly to show the universal corruption both of Jews and Gentiles, that he might prove them all guilty before the tribunal of God. There is none righteous. — The words in this verse, and those contained in verses 11 and 12, are taken from Psalms, xiv. and liii., which are the same as to the sense, although they do not follow the exact expressions. But does it seem proper that Paul should draw a consequence in relation to all, from what David has only said of the wicked in his time? The answer is, that the terms which David employs are too strong not to contemplate the universal corruption of the human race. “The Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside; they are all together become filthy; there is none that doeth good — no, not one.” This notifies universal depravity, so that the application is just according to the prophet. It is not that he means to deny that God had sanctified some men by his Spirit; for on the contrary, in the same Psalm, he speaks of the afflicted, of whom God is the refuge; but he means to say that in the state of nature, and without the grace of regeneration, which God vouchsafes only to his elect, who are a small number, the whole human race is in a state of universal depravity and guilt. This is also what is meant by Paul, and it is the use, as is clear from the context, that he designed to make of this passage of David.

Dr Macknight supposes that this expression, “there is none righteous,” applies to the Jewish common people, and is an Eastern expression which means that comparatively very few are excepted. There is not the shadow of ground for such a supposition. It is evident that both the passages quoted, and the Apostle’s argument, require every individual of the human race to be included. And on what pretence can it be restricted to “the Jewish common people?” Whether were they or their leaders the objects of the severest reprehensions of our Lord during his ministry? Did not Jesus pronounce the heaviest woes on the Scribes and Pharisees? Matt, xxiii. 13. Did he not tell the chief priests and elders that the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of heaven before them? Matt. xxi. 31.

Mr Stuart also supposes that the charge is not unlimited, and justifies this by alleging that the believing Jews must be excepted. But it is clear that the believing Jews are not excepted. For though they are now delivered, yet they were by nature under sin as well as others, and that all men are so is what Paul is teaching. In this manner Dr Macknight and Mr Stuart remove the foundation of the proofs here adduced by the Apostle, that all men are sinners. Mr Stuart also appears to limit the charges to the Jews, and in support of this refers to the 9th and 19th verses. The 9th verse speaks of both Jews and Gentiles, the purpose of the 19th evidently is to prove that the Jews are not excepted, while the 20th clearly shows that the whole race of mankind are included, it being the general conclusion which the Apostle draws from all he had said, from the 18th verse of the first chapter, respecting both Jews and Gentiles, of whom he affirms, in the 9th verse, that they were all under sin. And is it not strictly true, in the fullest import of the term, that there is none righteous in himself, no, not one? Is not righteousness the fulfilling of the law? And do not the Scriptures testify, and every where show, that “there is no man that sinneth not?” 1 Kings, viii. 46. “Who can say I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin? Prov. xx. 9. “For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good and sinneth not,” Eccl. vii. 20. And the Apostle James, including himself as well as his brethren to whom he wrote, declares, “In many things we all offend.”

In the same way, Taylor of Norwich, in his Commentary, supposes that in this and the following verses, to 19th, the Apostle means no universality at all, but only the far greater part, and that they refer to bodies of people, of Jews and Gentiles in a collective sense, and not to particular persons. To this President Edwards, in his treatise on Original Sin, p. 245, replies, “If the words 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 Scripture, 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. What instance is there in the Scripture, or indeed any other writing, when the meaning is only the much greater part, where this meaning is signified in such a manner by repeating such expressions — They are all — they are all — they are all — together — every one — all the world; joined to multiplied negative terms, to show the universality to be without exception; saying. There is no Jlesh — there is none — there is none — there is none — there is none, four times over; besides the addition of no, not one — no, not one — once and again! — When the Apostle says, That every mouth may he stopped, must we suppose that he speaks only of those two great collective bodies, figuratively ascribing to each of them a mouth, and means that those two mouths are stopped T Again, p. 241, “Here the thing which I would prove, mz. that mankind, in their first state, before they are interested in the benefits of Christ’s redemption, are universally wicked, is declared with the utmost possible fulness and precision. So that, if here this matter be not set forth plainly, expressly, and fully, it must be because no words can do it; and it is not in the power of language, or any manner of terms and phrases, however contrived and heaped one upon another, determinately to signify any such thing.”

V. 11. — There is none that understandeth, there is none that .seeketh after God»

Paul here applies equally to Jews and Gentiles, that which he charges upon the Gentiles, Eph. iv. 18, ‘’’Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness (or hardness) of their hearts.” This is true of every individual of the human race naturally.

The assertion, then, requires no limitation with respect to those who are now believers, for they were originally like others. All men are naturally ignorant of God, and by neglecting the one thing needful, show no understanding. They act more irrationally than the beasts. None that seeJceth after God, — To seek God is an expression frequently used in Scripture to denote the acts of religion and piety. It supposes the need all men have to go out of themselves to seek elsewhere their support, their life and happiness, and the distance at which naturally we are from God, and God from us — we by our perversity, and he by his just wrath. It teaches how great is the blindness of those who seek any thing else but God, in order to be happy, since true wisdom consists in seeking God for this, for he alone is the sovereign good to man. It also teaches us that during the whole course of our life, God proposes himself as the object that men are to seek, for the present is the time of his calling them, and if they do not find him, it is owing to their perversity, which causes them to flee from him, or to seek him in a wrong way. To seek God is, in general, to answer to all his relative perfections; that is to say, ta respect and adore his Sovereign Majesty, to instruct ourselves in his word as the primary truth, to obey his commandments as the commandments of the Sovereign Legislator of men, to have recourse to him by prayer as the origin of all things. In particular, it is to have recourse to his mercy by repentance; it is to place our confidence in Him; it is to ask for his Holy Spirit to support us, and to implore his protection and blessing.

V. 12. — They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doelh goodf no, not one.

Sin is a wandering or departure from the right way; that is to say, out of the way of duty and obligation, out of the way of the means which conduct to felicity. These are the ways open before the eyes of men to walk in them; he who turns from them, wanders out of the way. The prophet here teaches what is the nature of sin, he also shows us what are its consequences; for as the man who loses his way cannot have any rest in his mind, nor any security, it is the same with the sinner; and as a wanderer cannot restore himself to the right way without the help of a guide, in the same manner the sinner cannot restore himself, if the Holy Spirit does not come to his aid. The are together become unprotahle. — They have become corrupted, or have rendered themselves useless; for every thing that is corrupted loses its use. They are become unfit for that for which God made them; unprofitable to God, to themselves, and to their neighbour. There is none that doeth good no not one. — This is the same as is said above, there is none righteous and both the prophet and the Apostle make use of this repetition to enhance the greatness and the extent of human corruption.

V, 13. — Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips.

What the Apostle had said in the preceding verses was general, now he descends to something more particular, both respecting words and actions. As to words he marks all the organs of speech, the throat, the tongue, the lips, the mouth. All this tends to aggravate the depravity of which he speaks. The first part of this verse is taken from Psalm v. 9, and the last from Psalm cxl. 8. Open Sepulchre. — This figure graphically portrays the filthy conversation of the wicked. Nothing can be more abominable to the senses than an open sepulchre, where a dead body beginning to putrify steams forth its tainted exhalations. What proceeds out of their mouth is infected and putrid; and as the exhalation from a sepulchre proves the corruption within, so it is with the corrupt conversation of sinners. With their tongues they have used deceit — used them to deceive their neighbour, or they have flattered with the tongue, and this flattery is joined with the intention to deceive. This also characterises, in a striking manner, the way in which men employ speech to deceive each other, in bargains, and in every thing in which their interest is concerned. The poison of asps is wfider their lips. — This denotes the mortal poison, such as that of vipers or asps, that lies concealed under the lips, and is emitted in poisoned words. As these venomous creatures kill with their poisonous sting, so slanderers and evil-minded persons destroy the characters of their neighbours. “Death and life,” it is said, in the Book of Proverbs, “are in the power of the tongue.”

V. >. — ‘Whose mouth is full of cursing and bittei~ness»

This is taken from Psalm x. 7. Paul describes in this and the foregoing verse the four principal vices of the tongue, filthy and infected discourse, deceitful flatteries, subtle and piercing evil speaking, finally outrageous and open malediction. This last relates to the extraordinary propensity of men to utter imprecations against one another, proceeding from their being hateful and hating one another. Bitterness applies to the bitterness of spirit to which men give vent by bitter words. All deceit and fraud is bitter in the end; that is to say, desolating and afflicting.

V. 15 — Their feet are sioift to shed blood.

After having spoken of the depravity of the tongue, the Apostle comes to that of actions, which he describes in this and the two following verses. This passage is taken from Isaiah, lix. 7, and from Proverbs, i. 16, which describe the general corruption of men, the injustice and violence committed among them that are not restrained either by the consideration of the good of society, or by respect for the laws.

y. 16. — Destruction and misery are in their ways.

This must be understood in an active sense; that is to say, they labour to destroy and to ruin one another.

V- 17. — And the way of peace have they not known.

They have not known peace to follow and approve of it, in order to procure the good of their neighbour, for peace imports prosperity, or the way to maintain concord and friendship. Such is a just description of man’s ferocity, which fills the world with animosities, quarrels, hatred in their private connexions of families and neighbourhoods; and with revolutions and wars, and murders in public societies. The most savage animals do not destroy so many of their own species to appease their hunger, as man destroys of his fellows to satiate his ambition, his revenge, or cupidity.

V. 18. There is no fear of God before their eyeS’

This is taken from Psalm, xxxvi. 1. It is astonishing that men, while they acknowledge that there is a God, should act without any fear of his displeasure. Yet this is their character. They fear a worm of the dust like themselves, but disregard the Most High.

The Apostle could have collected a much greater number of passages from the law and the prophets to prove what he intended, for there is nothing more frequent in the Old Testament than the reproaches of God against the Israelites, and all men, on account of their abandoning themselves to sin; but these form a very complete description of the reign of sin among men. The first of them, v. 10, 11, 12, mark the character or disorders of the heart; the second, v. 13, 14, those of the words; the third, V. 15, 16, 17, those of the actions; and the last, V. 18, declares the cause of the whole. In the first, we see the greatness of the corruption, and its universality. Its greatness, in the extinction of all righteousness, of all wisdom, of all religion, of all rectitude, of all that is proper, and, in one word, of all that is good. Its universality, in that it has seized upon the whole man, without leaving any thing that is sound or entire. In the second, we see the four vices of the tongue which have been already pointed out. In the third, justice violated in what is most sacred, — the life of man; charity subverted in doing the evil, which it prohibits; and that, which is most fundamental and most necessary, peace destroyed. And in the last, what is most essential entirely cast off, which is the fear of God. In this manner, having commenced his enumeration of the evils to which men are addicted, by pointing out their want of understanding and desire to seek God, the Apostle terminates his description by exposing the source from whence they all flow, which is, that men are destitute of the fear of God, — his fear is not before their eyes to restrain them from evil. They love not his character, not rendering to it that veneration which is due — they respect not his authority. Such is the state of human nature, while the heart is not changed. From all this a faint idea may be formed of what will be the condition, in the future state, of those who shall perish, from whom the gospel has been hid — of those of whom the god of this world has blinded their minds, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine into them. Then the various restraints which in this life operate so powerfully, so extensively, and so constantly, will be taken off, and the natural depravity of fallen man will burst forth in all its unbridled and horrible wickedness.

V. 19 — Now we know thai what things soever the law saith, VOL. I. R

it sailh to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped and all the world may become guilty before God.

Paul here anticipates two general answers which might be made to those passages which he had just quoted, to convict the Jews, as well as all other men, of sin. First, that they are applicable not to the Jews but to the Gentiles, and that therefore it is improper to employ them against the Jews. Second, that even if they referred to the Jews, they could only be applied to some wicked persons among them, and not to the whole nation, so that what he intended to prove could not thence be concluded, namely, that no man can be justified before God by the law. In opposition to these two objections, he says, that when the laio speaks.^ it speaks to those who are under it — to the Jews, therefore; and that it does so in order that the mouths of all., without distinction, may be stopped. If God were to try the Jews according to the law, they could not stand before his strict justice, as David said,” If thou. Lord, shouldst mark iniquity; 0 Lord, who shall stand,^’ Psalm, cxxx.8. And, in addition to this, whatever there was of piety, and holiness in some, it was not by the efficacy of the law, but by that of the Gospel — not by the spirit of bondage, but by the spirit of adoption; so that it remains true, that all those who are under the law are under sin.

That or in order that. — This must be taken in three senses. The law brought against the Jews those accusations and reproaches of which Paul had produced a specimen in the passages quoted, in order that every mouth may be stopped; this is the end which the law proposed. This was also the object of God when he gave the law, for he purposed to make manifest the inicjuity of man, and the rights of justice. It was likewise the result of the legal economy. Every moiitJo Qnay le stopped. — This expression should be carefully remarked. For if a man had fulfilled the law, he would have something to allege before the Divine tribunal, to answer to the demands of justice; but when convicted as a sinner, he can only be silent — he can have nothing to answer to the accusations brought against him; he must remain convicted by them. This silence, then, is a silence of confession, of astonishment, and of conviction. This is what is elsewhere expressed by confusion of face. “O Lord, righteousness belongeth unto thee; but unto us, confusion of faces,” Daniel, ix. 7.

And all the world. — That is to say, both Jews and Gentiles. The law of nature, written on their consciences, sufficiently convicts the Gentiles, and as to the Jews, who try to stifle the conviction of their consciences by abusing the advantages which the law has brought to them’ that law itself, which accuses them, convicts them also. This expression, then, must include the whole human race. It applies to all men, of every age and every nation. None of all the children of Adam are excepted. Words cannot more clearly include, in one general condemnation, the whole human race. Who can be excepted? Not any of the Gentiles, since they have all been destitute of the knowledge of the true God. Not the Jews, for they are those whom the law itself accuses. Not believers, for they are only such through the acknowledgment they have made of their sins, since grace is the remedy to which they have had recourse to be freed from condemnation. All the world, then, signifies all men universally.

May become guilty. — That is, be compelled to acknowledge themselves guilty. The term guilty signifies subject to condemnation, and respects the Divine judgment. This manifestly proves, that in all this discussion the Apostle considers sin in relation to the condemnation which it deserves. Before God. — When the question is about appearing before men, people find many ways of escape, either by concealing their actions, or by disguising facts, or by disputing what is right. And even when men pass in review before themselves, self-love finds excuses, and various shifts are resorted to, and false reasonings, to deceive. But nothing of this sort can have place before God. For although the Jews flattered themselves, in the confidence of their own righteousness, and on this point all men try to deceive themselves, it will be entirely different in the day when they shall appear before the tribunal of God; for then there will be no more illusions of conscience, no more excuses, no way to escape condemnation. His knowledge is infinite, his hand is omnipotent, his justice is incorruptible, and nothing can be concealed from him. Before him, therefore, every mouth will be stopped, and all the world must confess themselves guilty.

7-^.20. — Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh bejustifed in his sight; for by the. law is the knowledge of sin.

This is the final conclusion drawn from the whole of the preceding discussion, beginning at verse 1 8th of chapter 1st- The Apostle had shown that both the Gentiles and the Jews are under sin; that is, they have brought down upon themselves the just condemnation of God. He had decided the same thing in the preceding verse, according to the Scriptures he had before quoted. Therefore. — The conclusion, then, from the whole is evident. Bt, the deeds of the law or as in the original, of law. — The reference here is to every law that God has given to man, whether expressed in words, or imprinted in the heart. It is that law which the Gentiles have transgressed, which they have naturally inscribed in their hearts. It is that law which the Jews have violated, when they committed theft, adulteries, and sacrileges, which convicted them of itnpiety, of evil speaking, of calumny, of murder, of injustice. In one word, it is that law which shuts the mouth of the whole world, as had been said in the preceding verse, and brings m all men guilty before God.

The deeds or works of law. — When it is said, by works of law no flesh shall be justified, it is not meant that the law, whether natural or written, was not capable of leading to righteousness, or that the righteousness thus resulting, were men to fulfil all that it demands, would not be a true righteousness, but that no man being able to plead the fulfilment of the law before the tribunal of God — that perfect obedience which it requires — no man can receive by the law a sentence pronouncing him to be righteous. To say that the works of the law are not good and acceptable, and would not form a true righteousness, would contradict what had been affirmed in the preceding chapter, v. 13 — that the doers of the law shall he justified’ The Apostle, then, does not propose here to show either the want of power of the law, or the insufficiency of its works for justification, but solely to prove that no man fulfils the law, that both Gentiles and Jews are under sin, and that all the world is guilty before God. No flesh. — This reference appears to be to Psalm cxliii. David there says, “no man living Paul says,” noflesh.’’^ The one is a term which marks a certain dignity, the other denotes meanness. The one imports, that whatever excellence there might be supposed to be in man, he could not be justified before God; and the other, that being only flesh, that is to say, corruption and weakness, he ought not to pretend to justification by himself. Thus, on whatever side man regards himself, he is far from being able to stand before the strict judgment of God.

Shall he justified. — The meaning of this term, as used by the Apostle in the whole of this discussion, is evident by the different expressions in this verse. It appears by the therefore with which the verse begins, that it is a conclusion which the Apostle draws from the whole of the foregoing discussion. Now, all this discussion has been intended to show that neither Gentiles nor Jews could elude the condemnation of the Divine judgment. The conclusion, then, that no flesh shall be justified in his sight by the works of the law, can only signify, that no man can obtain by means of his works a favourable sentence from Divine justice. It is in this sense that David has taken the term justify in Psalm cxliii, to which the Apostle had reference, Enter not into judgment with thy servant; for in thy sight shall no man living he justijied- The terms, in thy sights testify the same thing, for they accommodate themselves to the idea of a tribunal, before vthich men must appear to be judged. It is the same with regard to the other terms, by the deeds of the late; for if we understand a justification of judgment, the sense is plain; no one can plead before the tribunal of God a perfect and complete fulfilment of the law, such as strict and exact justice demands; no one, then, can in that way obtain justification.

For by the law is the knowledge of sin. — Paul does not here intend simply to say, that the law makes known in general the nature of sin, inasmuch as it discovers what is acceptable or displeasing to God, what he commands, and what he forbids; but he means to affirm that the law convicts men of being sinners. For his words refer to what he had just before said in the preceding verse, that all that the law saith, it saith to them loho are under the law; that every mouth may he stopped, and all the tcorld may become guilty before God, which marks a conviction of sin. But how, it may be said, does the law give that knowledge or that conviction of sin I It does so in two ways. By the application of its commandments, and its prohibitions in the present state in which man is placed, for it excites and awakens the conscience, and gives birth to accusing thoughts. This is common both to the written law and the law of nature. It does this, secondly, by the declaration of punishments and rewards which it sets before its transgressors and observers, and as it excites the conscience, and gives rise to fear and agitation, thus bringing before the eyes of men the dreadful evil of sin. This also is alike common to the law of nature and the written law.

Here it is important to remark, that Grod, having the design to establish only one way of justification for all men, has permitted, in his providence, that all should be guilty. For if there had been any excepted, there would have been two different ways of justification, and consequently two true rehgions, and two true churches, and believers would not have had that unity of communion which grace produces. It was necessary, then, to permit that all should become guilty, Rom. xi. 32; Gal. iii. 22.