by dutiful obedience;" Chalmers takes the same view of them; others translate them, "fail to attain the approbation of God," and cite John xii. 43 for this meaning of doga; according to others, again, the meaning is, "they come short of that glorious image of God, wherein man was originally created." But surely the glory which St. Paul here tells us that man, unaided by divine grace, is unable to attain, is that glory of which he speaks chap. v. 2, and in the hope of which, he there tells us, those who have been justified by faith are, through Christ, enabled to rejoice. In that passage, doέa does not signify "approbation," for that is already implied in the state of grace into which the believer was admitted, but it signifies that future glory which the souls of the blessed shall enjoy in heaven, while those who continue in sin fall short of it through their own demerit (see chap. ii. 7, 10; viii. 18; Col. iii. 4; 2 Tim. ii. 10).

Verse 24.-Swpeav. Justification, as regards us, was a free gift, wholly unmerited on our part, but not gratuitous on the part of God, for a priceless ransom was paid for us, even the precious blood of our dear Lord. ουχ απλως ειπε λυτρώσεως αλλ' απολυτρώσεως μηκετι ἡμας επανελθειν παλιν επι την αυτην δουλειαν.—Chrysostom. "He has said not merely ' release,' but 'redemption,' intimating that we should never return again to the same bondage." (1 Cor. vi. 20; 1 Pet. i. 18, 19.)

Verses 25, 26.—Here the expressions προέθετο, ἱλαστηριον, δικαιοσυνης, δια παρεσιν, προγεγονότων, εν τη ανοχή, are severally susceptible of different interpretations, each of which has had its advocates, so that the explanations of this passage, which have been put forward by different commentators, are almost as numerous as the combinations that may be formed out of these various interpretations, and it is scarcely possible to arrive at an exposition of it to which some degree of uncertainty shall not attach.

πроεто is by some translated "fore-ordained;" it seems to have been so understood by Chrysostom, who observes-δηλῶν δε παλιν ου νεωτερον τουτο ον ουδε καινον φησι προεθετο “ moreover, to show that this prou ceeding was nothing new nor strange, he uses the expression foreordained ;'" but the common version, "set forth," accords better with classical usage, and also with the context, especially with the word evdeığı, twice repeated; it implies that Christ was held up to the view of a perishing world, as the all-sufficient remedy for sin, that every awakened sinner might look unto him for salvation.

Daorηpiov occurs but once again in the New Testament (Heb. ix. 5), where it denotes the mercy-seat in the holy of holies (see Exod. xxv. 22); in this sense it is invariably used by the LXX.; if, in the present instance,

St. Paul has borrowed it from that source, it may intimate, that as the glory of the Lord rested on the mercy-seat, and the incense which typified holy prayers was offered, and the blood of atonement sprinkled before it, and all grace dispensed from it, so has the divine glory dwelt in Christ, and through his intercession holy prayers are accepted, and in heaven he pleads the merit of his precious blood-shedding, and from him is all grace dispensed to his people that trust in him. But the meaning assigned to the word, in the received version, accords much better with the context; in this view, ἱλαστηριον, whether regarded as an adjective with θυμα, or ἱερειον understood, as in σωτηριον, χαριστήριον, or a substantive like δικαστ τηριον, θυσιαστηριον, φυλακτήριον, is equivalent to ἱλασμος, a propitiation. In this meaning the word is used by Josephus, who says of the martyrs that they were-ὥσπερ αντιψυχον της του εθνους ἁμαρτιας και δια του άλματος των ευσεβών εκείνων και του ἱλαστηριου του θανατου αυτων ἡ θεια προνοια τον Ισραηλ διέσωσε—“ in some measure, a vicarious sacrifce for the sin of the nation, and by the blood of these godly men, and the propitiation made by their death, divine providence saved Israel." I have followed Mr. Alford's suggestion, in joining ev αυτου ἁιματι with ἱλαστηριον rather than with δια της πίστεως, to avoid the singularity of expression introduced by the latter construction.

dikaιoons has been variously translated-" goodness" or "mercy," "faithfulness," "judicial righteousness or justice," and "justification”— the meaning of the word is surely the same here as in verses 21, 22, where its relation to dikawoŋσera in verse 20, and indeed the whole context, shows that it denotes "the method of justification" appointed of God—the divine plan for satisfying at once the claims both of justice and of mercy (see Appendix, chap. i. 17).

δια την παρεσιν is by some translated "concerning the remission;" by

66

66

others, on account of the overlooking." I do not remember an instance of dia used for περί, concerning;" its meaning here is “for,” or “in order to,” “with a view to," which the apostle would probably have expressed by us, but for the occurrence of that word immediately before. It is doubtful whether Tapeow denote "remission," or "overlooking," "passing by," but the former meaning would probably be expressed by aperis; the latter, moreover, accords better with avoxn, “forbearance,” remission being the work of "grace;" the difference, however, is not great, as we may infer from Micah vii. 18—τις Θεος ὥσπερ συ εξαιρων ανομιας υπερβαινων ασέβειας.

πроуεуоνоτν, according to some, refers to the sins of the whole world before the death of Christ; thus Olshausen-"Those sins of the world, before Christ, which had hitherto been, as it were, overlooked (Psalm

lxxviii. 38), rendered necessary the final manifestation of God's righteousness, and were punished by the righteous God in Christ, the representative of the whole race, who freely gave himself up for all.” (Exod. xxxii. 34 ; Acts xvii. 30.) Alford's explanation of the words amounts to the same. But if the sins of earlier generations were overlooked from a prospective regard to the vicarious sufferings of Christ, it would follow that those generations were altogether exempt from final condemnation. It is far more probable that πрoyeуovотwv relates to the sins of each individual committed before his conversion.

Some translate ev Tη avoxn "during the time of God's forbearance," in opposition to ev tw vvv kaɩpw, and refer to Acts xvii. 30; but if ev ever signifies "during," it is only when joined to a word denoting time, as χρονω, καιρω, ώρα, ἡμερα, ετει, &c. ; here it means "by” or "through." Archbishop Magee, in his work on atonement, has made the following remarks on these verses: -“The object of the inspired reasoner is not so much to show how, in the method adopted for the remission of sins, mercy was to be displayed, as how, notwithstanding this display of mercy, justice was to be maintained. In either view, the sense terminates in the same point, the reconciling with each other the two attributes of mercy and justice, but the emphasis of the argument takes opposite directions." That the emphasis of the argument is rightly laid on the vindication of divine justice, he adds, "must be manifest, on considering that in remission of sins mercy is the quality that immediately presents itself, whilst justice might seem to be for the time superseded; on this principle of interpretation, the sentence will stand thus 'whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, for the manifestation of his justice (his just and righteous dealing), concerning the remission of past sins, through the forbearance of God, for the manifestation at this time of his justice, that he might be just, and yet (i.e., although) the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.' The justice of the Deity, or his regard to what is righteous and just, is thus declared not to have been departed from in the scheme of redemption, this scheme bearing a twofold relation to sinners, in such a manner, that whilst it manifested the mercy of God, it should, at the same time, in no degree lay a ground for the impeachment of his justice." We have already assigned sufficient reasons for concluding that Sikaloσvvη here signifies, not "justice," but "the divine plan of justification," and dia, not "concerning," but "for," or "in order to." The argument lays no more emphasis on the vindication of divine justice than on the exhibition of divine love, but directs attention equally to both of those attributes.

The passage quoted from Barrow, in our note on this verse, concludes

6

thus" Lastly, the means of conveying it (justification), implied in the words, the remission of fore-past sins,' such as was solemnly exhibited, signified, ratified in the church ministries of baptism, absolution, and reconciliation, upon penance and confession, especially the first." I have omitted this sentence from the quotation, because, with every respect for the judgment of that great divine and illustrious man, I can discover nothing in the context to warrant the opinion that St. Paul intended any reference to these church ministries.

Verse 26.— εν τω νυν καιρω. ΤΟ δε εν τω νυν καιρω του πολλην δείκνυντος ανοχήν και φιλανθρωπίαν, ότε γαρ απεγνωσθημεν και επληρώθησαν ὡι ἁμαρτιαι τοτε την ἑαυτου δυναμιν επεδείξατο ἵνα μαθης ποσα παρ αυτω τησ δικαιοσυνης ἡ περιουσία, ουτε γαρ εν αρχη γενόμενον τουτο ουτω bavμaorov av eparn.-Chrysostom. "To set forth his plan of justification at this time was the act of a being resolved to show much forbearance and much love to man; for when our case was desperate, and the measure of our sins had been filled up, then he exhibited his power, that you might learn how vast is the superabundance of his justifying grace, for if this had been done in the beginning, it would not have appeared so deserving of admiration."

tov ek twtews Inơov, “him that believeth in Jesus” (Gal. iii. 7, 9) as di ek tepitoμns, “they that are circumcised” (chap. iv. 12; Acts x. 45 ; xi. 2); di eέ epideias, "they that are contentious" (chap. ii. 8).

Verse 27.-€€λeuron, "it has been altogether excluded;" a stronger expression than the simple εκλεισθη.

δια ποιου νόμου, “ by what principle ? what system ?” των έργων ; “ is it by the principle that a man may challenge justification as the reward of his own works? No; but by the principle that justification can be obtained only through faith." This meaning of voμos seems to suit the context better than any other; it occurs in a somewhat similar sense chap. vii. 21, 23.

Verse 29. ως αν ει έλεγε. δια τι γαρ σοι τούτο ατοπον είναι δοκεί το παντα ανθρωπον σώζεσθαι; μη γαρ μερικός εστι ὁ Θεός; — Chrysostom. “As if the apostle had said, 'why should it seem strange to you that all men should be saved? is God the God only of a part of mankind?

Verse 30.—ELTEр, “since," "seeing that ;" the later MSS. read eeTEP, probably to make the meaning more clear, but there was no necessity for

66

the change, for ETEρ often has the same meaning as eTeɩTep* (see note, chap. viii. 9, 17). Mr. Alford's translation "If at least God is one, who shall justify the circumcision by faith," &c. does not accord so well with the context, and it is very questionable whether it would, in any case, be a legitimate rendering of the Greek.

Els ò eos. cos having the article must be the subject of the proposition.

On Ek and dia see page 107.

Verse 31.-Here vouos is without the article, because it is used, in a general sense, for God's law, whether natural or revealed. Bishop Middleton's interpretation of it, viz., "moral obedience," is as little warranted here as in verse 21, or in chap. ii. 25.

66

CHAP. IV.

66

Verse 1.—τι ουν ερούμεν Αβρααμ τον πατερα, &c. Some of the oldest MSS. read τι ουν ερούμεν ευρηκεναι Αβρααμ, &c. ; this change in the order of the words was adopted, probably, for the purpose of bringing κатα σαρκα nearer to πατερα ἡμων, and thus rendering the interpretation easier. But although it is more obvious and easy to join κατα σαρκα with πατερα than with cupηkevaι, it is not the true construction of the passage; for the question, tɩ ovv epovμev, &c., is a supposed Jewish objection to the statement (chap. iii. 30) that God will justify the uncircumcised and the circumcised alike, by faith; now a Jew, objecting to that statement, would not call Abraham our father according to the flesh," but, simply, our father Abraham," as in Matt. iii. 9; John viii. 33, 39; for the addition of κaта σapka, besides expressing carnal descent, would imply also some recognition of a spiritual relationship to which he was a stranger; kaтA σаρκа therefore must be joined with eupŋkevaɩ, as commentators, with few exceptions, have done. But it is no easy matter to determine the precise meaning of the phrase ευρηκεναι κατα σαρκα ; we can hardly expect to find any illustration of it in classic Greek, for it relates to a subject quite out of the range of heathen thought, and therefore no phrase similar or analogous to it is, I believe, to be found in heathen writers. Such ex

Thus, in Euripides—Ovkovv dikaιws, eineρ elpyaσw кака; Hecuba, 1236—where the scholiast explains etπep by exeɩdn, which indeed is its obvious meaning.