That St. Paul has treated the doctrine of justification by faith with especial reference to the prejudices of the Jews is obvious. But it is not a necessary inference from this mode of treatment, that a Judaizing tendency prevailed among his readers.

The objections brought forward on the part of the Jew are inherent in the subject itself, and must have entered into

a discussion of the doctrine to whomsoever addressed.

Moreover St. Paul's own mind was full of the questions concerning Judaism, and the mode of treating it. The Epistle to the Churches of Galatia had been written but a short time before there the Judaizing party had striven to the utmost to accommodate Christianity itself to Jewish prejudices. St. Paul had vehemently opposed this retrograde movement both in person and in his Epistle. Now he could regard the whole question of the relation of Judaism to the Gospel more calmly, deliberately, and comprehensively. For he was writing to a Church in which he had no personal antagonists, and where party-spirit had not yet embittered the great controversy: a Church moreover set in the midst of so numerous a colony of unbelieving Jews, that the question of their rejection was seen in all the greatness of its proportions.

Hence we see that the subject discussed in Chapters ix-xi. cannot possibly be regarded as a mere historical appendix, nor as a corollary to the previous doctrine: it is in fact the reconciliation of that doctrine to the great and pressing difficulty which had arisen from the rejection of the Gospel by the great mass of the Jewish people.

ix. 1-5. MOURNING OVER ISRAEL. With seeming abruptness, yet in close connexion of thought, St. Paul passes from the joyful assurance of salvation for all the elect of God (viii. 28-39) to the mournful and mysterious contrast presented by the exclusion of the chosen people on whom so many and great privileges had been bestowe 1.

vv. 6–13. GOD'S PROMISE HAS NOT

FAILED.

The present rejection of Israel is not to be regarded as a failure of God's promise; the unbelief of some does not make the faithfulness of God of none effect, iii. 3; for the promise was not to all the seed of Abraham after the flesh, but to the chosen seed, not to Ishmael but to Isaac, not to Esau but to Jacob.

VV. 14-18. NOR IS THERE ANY INJUSTICE IN GOD.

Far be it from us to say that God is unjust in thus choosing one and rejecting another, before they have done good or evil. His choice is not determined by the merit of man's works, but by His own free and undeserved mercy, for it is proved by His words to Moses and to Pharaoh that "on whom he will, he hath mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth." On the reference to Pharaoh in v. 17 see the foot-note and the Additional note at the end of the chapter.

vv. 19-21. GOD'S ALMIGHTY WILL MAY NOT BE QUESTIONED.

If God's will is absolutely free and irresistible, "why doth He yet find fault?” Why hold man responsible?

The Apostle first rebukes the arrogance of thus contending with God, and asserts that His rightful power (ovoía) over man is as absolute and unquestionable as that of the potter over the clay that he fashions.

Had this been the only answer, the Jew could not have found fault with it, for it is drawn from his Scriptures; but St. Paul has another answer.

vv. 22-29. GOD'S JUSTICE AND MERCY

VINDICATED.

After asserting God's unquestionable right to deal with the creatures of His hand according to His Will, the Apostle proceeds to justify God's actual dealing with Israel, as characterised by longsuffering towards those who were deserving only of wrath, and by mercy towards those whom He called both from

among Jews and also from among Gentiles to be His people.

Moreover both the calling of the Gentiles, and the rejection of all except a small remnant of Israel, had been foretold by the Prophets, a proof that there had been no failure of His promise in its true meaning.

vv. 30-33. THE PARADOX EXPLAINED. It is a strange result that Gentiles who were not consciously seeking righteousness attained to righteousness, while Israel, who sought, did not attain unto a law of righteousness. And wherefore? Because the Jews did not seek what the Gentiles attained, a righteous ness of faith, but sought righteousness by works of law, and so stumbled against the Rock which was laid in Zion for a sure foundation to every one that believeth.

We must not leave this Chapter without drawing attention to the great importance of the statement of Christ's Deity in v. 5, and to the general misunderstanding of the passage concerning Pharaoh (v. 17) consequent on the defective translation of the original passage in the A. V. Both points are fully discussed in the Additional Notes to the Chapter.

X 1-4. THE CAUSE OF ISRAEL'S
STUMBLING.

They sought to establish their own righteousness by works of law, and refused to submit to God's righteousness which is attained by faith, because they were ignorant that "law," regarded as a way of attaining to righteousness before God, is at an end in Christ, in order that righteousness may be extended to every one that believeth.

wv. 5-10. THE TESTIMONY Of Moses.

Israel ought not to have been ignorant of "the righteousness which is of faith," for Moses himself not only "describeth the righteousness which is of law," but also speaks of another kind of righteousness, a religion of the heart, which is the righteousness of faith in Christ.

บบ. 11-21. THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF FAITH IS OFFERED TO ALL, BUT REJECTED BY ISRAEL.

St. Paul emphatically asserts the universality of the statement already quoted in ix. 33, "Whosoever believeth on Him shall not be ashamed" (Isai. xviii. 16) as proving that in the righteousness of faith there is no difference between Jew and Greek; and then from two other passages (Joel ii. 30; Isai. lii. 7) proves that the Gospel must be preached to all.

"But they did not all obey the glad tidings:" yet it was not from want of hearing, nor of warning, for Moses and Isaiah foretold both the reception of the Gentiles, and the disobedience of Israel.

xi. THE RESTORATION OF ISRAEL.

mated that the unbelief of the great mass Twice already the Apostle has intiof the Jews has not annulled the faithfulness of God's promises (iii. 3; ix. 6). The same thought is here brought into close connexion with the certainty of salvation for God's elect (viii. 28-39), "God hath not cast away His people, who are the true Israel? Not the unwhich He foreknew," the true Israel. But believing mass (compare ix. 6), but the "remnant according to election of grace." The existence of such a remnant of believing Israelites amid a general apostasy proves now, as in Elijah's days, that God had not rejected Israel as a people.

And as He has not rejected the people on account of the unbelief of the majority, so neither has He preserved the remnant on account of their own merit, but only of grace (vv. 1-6).

What then is the result? The mass of Israel seeking righteousness of works obtained it not; the elect, foreknown of God, and chosen to be His people, obtained righteousness of grace through faith and this hardening of the mass is what the Prophets have foretold as a just judgment from God (vv. 7–10).

But what is God's purpose herein? Is it that they should fall finally? Far from it: already their stumbling has brought salvation to the Gentiles, and this transfer of God's favour shall provoke the Jews to jealousy, and so end in the

restoration of God's ancient people, and a new life of the world (vv. 11-15). Such a restoration is natural, for the holy root of the chosen race makes its branches holy: ye Gentiles are but grafts of wild olive enriched by that holy root. Boast not that natural branches were broken off to make room for you; for if God spared not them neither will He spare thee, and if they turn from their unbelief, the goodness and power of God which grafted thee contrary to nature into the good olive, shall much more surely graft in again the natural branches (16-24).

This Divine purpose, that the hardening of Israel should bring salvation to the Gentiles, and so lead at last to the restoration of all Israel, is a mystery revealed now, and long since indicated in Isaiah and God's gracious purposes can never fail, but even disobedience is so overruled that He may have mercy upon all (25-32).

O depth of God's wisdom surpassing all that man's heart could conceive! O depth of inexhaustible riches, receiving from none but giving freely to all! For from Him as their first cause all things begin, through Him still working in them they work together, and unto Him they tend as the final cause of all: "To Whom be the glory for ever, Amen" (vv. 33-56). It is impossible to look back on the whole course of the Apostle's argument, from the revelation of God's wrath against an ungodly world (i. 18) to this mystery of God's all-embracing mercy, without feeling that, whatever local, temporary, or personal circumstances may have induced St. Paul to address this letter to Rome, such an exposition of the Gospel could only have proceeded from the mind of one who was moved by the Holy Ghost to write for all ages and for all mankind. 'A more far-reaching glance was never cast over the Divine plan of the history of the world" (Godet).

66

IV. EXHORTATION TO CHRISTIAN
DUTIES.

The doctrinal part of the Epistle now concluded is followed by an exposition

of Christian duty closely connected with it, and hardly less systematic and comprehensive. It consists of two main portions:

(a) The general duties of the Christian life (xii., xiii.);

(b) The special duty of mutual forbearance and charity in regard to things non-essential (xiv. 1–xv. 13).

(a) xii., xiii. THE Christian's Duties

TOWARDS GOD, AND TOWARDS MAN.

The Apostle has set forth "the mercies of God" in his survey of the Divine purpose and method of salvation. These mercies he now applies as motives to holiness, beginning with the central thought of self-consecration. Conform not even outwardly to the fashion of this world, but be inwardly transformed, your bodies being devoted to God's service, your minds renewed to know His perfect will (1, 2).

Presume not on special gifts, but as members of one body in Christ employ them for the good of all (3-8). Let love, the soul of all Christian virtues, animate your conduct towards your brethren in Christ, and towards all men, even your enemies (9-21).

Obey the rulers of the State, as powers ordained of God (xiii. 1-7). Fulfil the royal law of mutual love (8-10), and remembering that the day of Christ is at hand, put on the armour of light, put on the new man (11-14).

SPECIAL EXHOR(b) xiv. 1-XV. 13. TATION TO MUTUAL FORBEARANCE BETWEEN CHRISTIANS.

Despise not the scruples of the weak conscience, neither condemn the freedom of the strong. We are all God's servants: do all things as unto the Lord: and prepare for His judgment, instead of judging one another (1-13). In things indifferent give no offence; for meat or drink lead not thy brother into sin (24-23).

Let the strong bear with the weak, as Christ has borne with us: receive one another, as Christ has received us (xv. 1-7). He came to fulfil God's

promises to Israel, and to extend God's mercy to the Gentiles: rejoice in Him, for ye are all His people (8-13).

The Apostle's reason for addressing to the Christians at Rome this special exhortation to mutual forbearance is to be sought in the divergence of views between the Jewish and Gentile believers see above, pp. 17, 18.

V. CONCLUSION:

(a) The writer's motives and prospects (xv. 14-33);

(b) Concluding salutations (xvi.).

(a) Bear with my boldness in admonishing you, for I am a minister of Christ, to present the Gentiles as an acceptable offering (14-16). I glory therefore, yet only in what Christ has wrought through my preaching His Gospel to them who had not heard His name (17-21). Often hindered by this duty, I now am free to come to you on my journey into Spain, as soon as I have carried to Jerusalem the alms of the Gentile Churches here (22-29). Pray for my deliverance from the unbelieving Jews, for the acceptance of my service by the saints, and for my coming to you in joy. "And the God of peace be with you all” (30–33).

(b) Commendation of Phoebe (1, 2); Apostolic greetings (3-16); Warning against false teachers (17-20); Salutations from St. Paul's companions (2123); Benediction (24); Doxology (2527).

On the contents of this Chapter compare § 8, pp. 24-29.

There is a close correspondence between the Introduction and the Conclusion of the Epistle, both in form and thought. The section (a) answers to i. 8-15, while in (b) we find in the Doxology a fulness of thought and majesty of expression which harmonize well with the character of the opening address (i. 1-7).

APPENDIX.

"THE LAW," THE FLESH."

In several important passages of this Epistle it is essential to a right understanding of St. Paul's argument that we

should be able to determine the exact meaning of the word "law" (vóμos) with and without the Definite Article.

"It must be admitted," says Bp. Middleton, 'On the Greek Article,' p. 303, "that there is scarcely in the whole N. T. any greater difficulty than the ascertaining of the various meanings of vóμos in the Epistles of St. Paul."

One of the earliest remarks on the subject is that of Origen on Rom. iii. 21: "Moris est apud Græcos nominibus appa præponi, quæ apud nos possunt Articuli nominari. Si quando igitur Mosis legem nominat, solitum nomini præmittit Articulum: si quando vero naturalem vult intelligi, sine Articulo nominat legem." Though the form of the first sentence (apud Græcos," "apud nos") shews that it is due to the Latin translator Rufinus, the rule about the use of the article seems to have proceeded from Origen himself: for it is the basis of his whole interpretation of Rom. iii. 21, both in the Commentary and in the Philocalia, cap. ix.

It is admitted on all hands that this rule, so far as it refers to the Law of Moses is generally true, i.e. that where the law of Moses is meant vóμos usually has the Article prefixed.

Is the rule true without exceptions?

If there are any exceptions, are they merely arbitrary, or can they be explained on any known principle, so as not to destroy the general rule?

In other words does St. Paul use νόμος and ὁ νόμος indifferently to signify the particular law of Moses?

Bp. Middleton maintains the general truth of the rule, admitting "no other exceptions than those by which words the most definite are frequently affected." We must first inquire on what principle the general rule is founded, and then consider the alleged exceptions.

A clear view of the nature of the Article, and of the effect of its insertion or omission, was long since given by Mr. T. S. Green, "Grammar of the N. T. Dialect," 1842, p. 132. "The Article is prefixed to a word, when it conveys an idea already in some degree familiarized to the mind, and in so doing