Romans 3:21

GOD'S JUSTIFYING RIGHTEOUSNESS THROUGH FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST, ALIKE ADAPTED TO OUR NECESSITIES AND WORTHY OF HIMSELF. (Rom 3:21-26)

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.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rom_3:21-26

But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested.

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 mans 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 Gods 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.)

Gods righteousness mans fear and mans 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.)

Gods 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 Gods 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 Gods moral law.

2. The whole world is proven guilty in Gods 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 Gods 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 mans 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 Gods 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 mans 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 mans 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 sinners 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 sinners 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 serpents 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 peoples 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 sinners reach, that if he once hears of it he cannot perish, without putting it from him and rejecting it. The brazen serpent was Gods 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, Christs 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.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 3:21-24. But now the righteousness of God — That is, the manner of becoming righteous which God hath appointed; without the law — Without that perfect and previous obedience which the law requires; without reference to, or dependance on, the law, ceremonial or moral, revealed or natural; is manifested — In the gospel, being attested by the law and the prophets. The example of Abraham’s justification by faith, recorded Gen 15:6, and the passage which the apostle quotes, Rom 4:7, from Psa 32:1-2, as well as that from Habakkuk, quoted Rom 1:17, are clear testimonies, from the law and the prophets, that there is a righteousness without the law, which God accepts; and that the method of justification revealed in the gospel was the method in which men were justified under the law, and before the law: in short, it is the method of justifying sinners, established from the very beginning of the world. Even the righteousness of God — That which God hath appointed to be, by faith of Jesus Christ — By such a firm, hearty, lively belief of Christ’s being what the gospel declares him to be, a divinely-commissioned and infallible Teacher, a prevalent Mediator between God and man; an all- sufficient Saviour, and a righteous Governor; such a belief as produces a sincere confidence in him, a true subjection to him, a conscientious obedience to his laws, and imitation of his example. Unto all — Which way of justification is provided for, and sincerely and freely offered unto all, and is bestowed upon all them that believe — Whether Jews or Gentiles; for there is no difference — Either as to men’s need of justification and salvation, or the manner of attaining it. For all have sinned — In Adam and in their own persons; by a sinful nature, sinful tempers, and sinful actions; and come short of the glory of God — The supreme end of man; short of his image and nature, and communion with him, and the enjoyment of him in heaven. Or, they have failed of rendering him that glory that was so justly his due, and thereby have not only made themselves unworthy the participation of glory and happiness with him, but stand exposed to his severe and dreadful displeasure. The word υσερουνται, here rendered come short, is properly applied to those, whose strength failing them in the race, are left behind. The word, therefore, is very suitable to mankind, who, being weakened by sin, have lost eternal life, the reward which they pursued by their obedience. Being justified — Pardoned and accepted, or accounted righteous; freely, δωρεαν, of free gift, and not through any merit of their own; by his grace — His unmerited favour, his undeserved goodness, and not through their own righteousness or works, in whole or in part. Freely by his grace — One of these expressions might have served to convey the apostle’s meaning: but he doubles his assertion in order to give us the fullest conviction of the truth, and to impress us with a sense of its peculiar importance. It is not possible to find words that should more absolutely exclude all consideration of our own works and obedience, or more emphatically ascribe the whole of our justification to free, unmerited goodness. Through the redemption which is in, or by, Christ Jesus — Procured for them by his death, the price paid for their redemption. The word απολυτρωσις, here and elsewhere rendered redemption, denotes that kind of redemption of a captive from death, which is procured by paying a price for his life. See note on 1Ti 2:6. The redemption purchased for us by Christ is deliverance from the guilt and power of sin, and the wrath of God consequent thereon, and from the power of our spiritual enemies, the devil, the world, and the flesh. See Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; Tit 2:14; Gal 1:4; 1Pe 1:18-19.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

II. THE REMEDY. JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH THROUGH THE ATONEMENT BY CHRIST.

1. Comprehensive Statement of Gratuitous Salvation by Faith in Christ’s Atoning Death, Rom_3:21-31.

This is the CENTRAL PARAGRAPH of the Epistle. In composing it our great apostle summons all his powers to the task of concentrating into one statement his doctrine of salvation “according to my gospel.” The paragraph is the solution of all that has preceded, and the theme of all that follows. It embraces the core and substance of positive and perfect Christianity, against which rationalizing yet irrational unbelief rebels, whether Judaistic, semi-Christian, or infidel, yet forever rebels in vain.

21. But—The small yet great hinging word on which the mighty argument turns—the transition point of the scheme and of the epistle.

Now—Under the new regimen of grace; after the old regimen of wrath depicted in the previous part of the epistle. The apostle springs into this blessed now with a joyous abruptness. He will range through it, leading us through rich and varied scenes of grace and glory.

Righteousness of God—Not merely that righteousness with which God is invested, but that righteousness with which, through Christ, he invests us. The latter is the radiant reflection from the former. It would much simplify the expression of Paul’s theology if all the branchings from the one root, δικαιος, right, righteous, or just, could be translated into English by similar branchings from one root. We should then have just, justify, (or just-make,) justification, (or just-making.) justice, (or just-being.) Or we should have right, (or righteous,) righteousness, (or rightness or right-being,) and rectification, (or righting, or right-making, or righteous-making.) This righteousness of God is God’s rectification or justification of man before the law, making him rectus in curia, or right in God’s court, or before his tribunal, being the opposite of condemnation by God’s law. Yet does it not include, though ever accompanied by, sanctification. For as justification is acquittal from past offences, so sanctification is the inward power, more or less, by grace conferred, to avoid commission of sin for the future. By the former the man comes right; by the latter man stays right. (See note on Mat_18:3.)

Without the law—Righteousness, though required of man by the law, can never be acquired through the law. The law being once broken can only condemn; it can never justify. Justification, then, can be attained only by some method without the law.

Is manifested—In the advent of Christ and the opening of the new revelation.

Law and the prophets—Note on Mat_5:17. To the Old Testament Church, looking forward to the New, the law and the prophets were promise and encouragement; to the New Testament Church, looking back, they are testimony and support. The law testified to Christ and his atonement both by its demand for satisfaction for sin and by its whole piacular ritual; the prophets, by fortelling the person and history of the Messiah.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Rom_3:22. By faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe.—Faith apprehends and appropriates a personal mediator. The righteousness of God.—Our participation by faith in Christ as being the only righteousness that God approves, and thus is here called “the righteousness of God through faith.”

Rom_3:23. The glory of God—viz., the divine approbation.

Rom_3:24.—The English, or rather Latin, word “redemption” is not a perfect synonym of the term employed by the apostle (ἀπολύτρωσις). It means a ransoming off—deliverance on the ground of ransom.

Rom_3:25.—God has openly exhibited Christ to the world as a propitiatory offering for sin, unto all who believe in Him, in order that He might fully exhibit His pardoning mercy (His δικαιοσύνη) in respect to the forgiveness of sins under the past and present dispensations (Stuart).

Rom_3:26.—Righteousness as distinguished from truthfulness and goodness on the one hand, and from mere justice on the other. Because of the pretermission of the former sins.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Rom_3:21-26

Divine justice vindicated.—Some say Christianity is played out. Perhaps the wish is father to the saying. We may seem to have taken a pessimistic view of Christianised society. Not quite. St. Paul’s collection of Old Testament texts cannot be applied to England, and to that we are indebted to Christianity. Our point is that some of the essential failings of Judaism are reproduced in Christianity, and we must be on our guard. We do not admit that Christianity is played out, but we allow that modern Pauls are needed to proclaim the old gospel with new power. The sinfulness of man must be declared, the righteousness of God proclaimed, and the way of salvation opened out by faith, as the result of grace, and through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. The opponents of the mediatorial scheme give grotesque representations of a supposed conflict between justice and mercy. Nevertheless, justice is not to be eliminated from the attributes of a perfect God. He is Himself just and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. All the dispensations of God make for righteousness. What we know not now we shall know hereafter. The climactic and indisputable proof of God’s justice is the setting forth of Jesus to be a propitiation.

I. God justifies Himself.—Of course not in the way of making Himself just, for that He always and essentially is; but in the way of showing His justice, and condescending to show to men that all His ways are right. Paul does not bring before us a one-sided Deity—a Being stripped of that attribute which must be the basis of an equitable moral government. Paul vindicates the righteousness of God in His former dealings with the race; and now he brings us to see in the atonement of Christ a crowning proof of justice, as well as a manifestation of love. God is just because He freely forgives men by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.

1. God declares His justice. The ancient prophet speaks of a just God and a Saviour. The apostle adopts the utterance. God’s justice declared by the different economies. The history of Israel a testimony. The form of divine justice has never been absent from the march of human events. All tend to the vindication of the eternal rectitude. A twofold love of the Father and the Son speaks to us from Calvary. The voice of justice also heard. The fatherhood of God must not destroy His kingship. Eli was a mild father, the type of the modern God of some, and his sons were ruined. God speaks and rules as a father-king. God is not a great, grim, and relentless justice, neither is He a pliant amiability. The Atonement declares God’s justice, and sets forth the truth that men cannot be saved merely on the ground that God is love.

2. God honours justice. The monarch as the representative of civil government, as the person to whom is delegated the central power around which the commonwealth is to move in circles of social order, must rule in justice tempered by mercy. God is surely more perfect. Around Him must be glorious circles of moral order. The Atonement has not wrested the sceptre from His grasp. He still sits on a throne which has justice and judgment for its foundation. A tyrant may arbitrarily pardon a rebel. A just God must devise means whereby rebels may be pardoned and justice honoured. God honoured justice when He gave His Son, for the Son was willing to be offered. In His case the sweet compulsive power of love was the only constraining force. If a life on earth of pleasure, of greatness, and of renown ending in a triumphant translation to a brighter sphere had been sufficient, God’s love would have demanded no more. If there was any violence in the moral transaction, it was Deity that did violence to His own loving nature in the interests of eternal justice.

3. God harmonises justice. The opponents make justice and mercy two abstractions. These ideal creations are seen wrestling for victory. One determines to punish; the other is equally determined to forgive. Being equally powerful, how is the contest to end? Now justice and mercy are not distinct personalities. They are attributes of the one great personality termed God. And there can be no fierce conflict, speaking after the manner of men. God in the eternal councils deliberates. God the Father and God the Son devise the wondrous method. Behold the result. Mercy and truth meet together. Righteousness and peace kiss each other when they hear the sad triumphant refrain, “It is finished.” Truth springs out of the earth which has been replenished by the stream flowing from the Rock of Ages. Righteousness looks down from heaven in glad approval. All nations must finally rejoice, for the Lord has given that which is good.

II. God justifies believers.—When God justifies Himself, He shows His justice. When God justifies the believer, He receives him as justified. God has made men moral agents, and does not justify them, the volition refusing the benefit. All are not justified because all are not willing—i.e., all who have heard. There is a condition. It is the simple one of faith, loving acceptance, the doctor’s prescription, the brazen serpent. Believe and live. Look and be saved. Take and be healed.

1. Believing involves a confession of guilt and of helplessness. Guilt is the awakened sense of moral sickness. The extent of feeling no matter. This is the world’s want—the power to feel as well as to understand.

2. Believing implies God’s right to punish. So that the man who believes in Christ does not make void the law and the authority of God. The believer suffers in himself the pangs of remorse, feels the pains of condemnation; but what would the judge say to or think of the criminal who should plead his pangs and his feelings as an atonement for his crimes?

3. Believing in Jesus Christ carries in it the declaration of human inability. Good works cannot save. High resolves cannot redeem. Noble endeavours cannot lift out of the pit. All the tears of a Niobe, should the race be concentrated in one image, and should the tears flow from the dawn of time to its close, cannot wash away sin. There is a fountain opened for sin and uncleanness. There is a propitiatory offering. Faith in Jesus Christ is the grand starting-point for noble endeavour, for moral enterprise, and for all holy living. Here are healing for the sick, bright raiment for the naked, precious gold for the poor, satisfying bread for the hungry, peace for the troubled, joy for the sorrowful, and laughter for the weepers.

4. Believing in Jesus Christ supposes loving consecration. The imperfection of many professing Christians must be admitted; but the candid soul must confess that the world’s noblest heroes have been produced by Christianity. A religion which could produce a Paul has in that one fact a good deal to say in its defence. And what should be said of a religion which has produced thousands who have followed in his train, though they have failed to reach his high measure of nobility?

The righteousness of God.—“But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets.” It is of sin and righteousness that the apostle speaks so fully and so minutely throughout this whole epistle.

I. It is the righteousness of God.—It is a divine, not a human, righteousness. That righteousness which we had lost in Adam was, after all, but a human thing, finite like him who lost it; but that which we gain is a divine righteousness, and by being divine forms an infinite compensation for that which Adam lost for us; and we in receiving it are made partakers of a most glorious exchange. It is called the righteousness of God, because it is a righteousness provided by Him—a righteousness which was conceived by Him and carried out in every part by Him. Again, it is called the righteousness of God, because it is a righteousness made up of the doings of the Son of God. It is not merely with His sufferings that this righteousness has to do, but it is with His doings as well. These two things enter into its composition, so that without both of them it would be imperfect. Further, it is called the righteousness of God, because it 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. It is a righteousness without the law.—He does not mean that it is in any sense an unlawful righteousness—a righteousness not based on law; but it means a righteousness 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 working to make it what it is—“the righteousness of God”; for did it require anything of this kind on our part, it would cease to be what it is here represented to be, “the righteousness of God,” and would become, to a large extent at least, “the righteousness of man.” This righteousness does not send us to the law in order to be justified. Let us hold fast then this truth of the gospel, this foundation truth—righteousness without law, righteousness founded in no sense upon our keeping of the law; but wholly and absolutely upon this fact, that another has kept the law for us, and that other no less than the Son of God Himself.

III. This righteousness has been “manifested.”—“Now,” he says, “the righteousness of God is manifested”; it has been clearly brought to light, so that there can be no mistake concerning it and no mystery in it. It is not a thing hidden, wrapped up, reserved, held back, veiled from our view. It has been clearly manifested. In every way God has sought to guard it against the possibility of being mistaken by man. In every way has He taken precautions against this being hidden from view or darkened by the words of man’s wisdom.

IV. This righteousness is a righteousness “to which the law and the prophets bear witness.”—By this expression we understand the whole of the Old Testament. It is not something (he means to tell us) now come to light for the first time, not understood in the ages gone by; it is something which has been proclaimed from the beginning hitherto. Righteousness shone down upon the pilgrimage of Old Testament worthies, and in the light of which they walked. On this righteousness they rested, in it they rejoiced. It is no new righteousness which we preach. It is no new foundation of which we tell. It is the old one, the well-proved one. It has been abundantly sufficient in past ages, and it has lost none of its efficiency now in these last days.

V. This righteousness is a righteousness which is by the faith of Jesus Christ.—“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.” He means to say by this expression that it is a righteousness which comes to us by believing in Jesus Christ. It is not our faith that is our righteousness; it is not our act of believing that justifies. If your faith were your righteousness, then faith would be just reduced to the level of all other works, and would be itself a work. If it were our faith, our act of faith, that justified, then should we be justified by our own acts, by our own deeds. The expression, then, “the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ,” means simply that it is a righteousness which passes over to us, and becomes available for us, by believing in Him whose righteousness it is—that is, by believing the Father’s testimony concerning Jesus Christ. Or it is just as if we were saying, I have no righteousness, seeing I am wholly a sinner; but I take this righteousness of the Son of God, and I draw near, expecting to be treated by God just as if I and not He were the righteous person. I cannot present any suffering to Him in payment of penalty; but I take this suffering of the Son of God, and I claim to have it reckoned to me as payment of my penalty. Thus it is “Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”

VI. This righteousness is a righteousness for the unrighteous.—It “is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” It is not righteousness for the good, but for the evil. It is not righteousness for the worthy, but for the unworthy. How foolish, then, to say as men, when convinced of sin, or when going back into former iniquity, are sometimes found saying, I am too great a sinner to be forgiven. Why, if you were not such a sinner, you would not need such a righteousness. This righteousness for the unrighteous is said by the apostle to be “unto all.” It is a righteousness which is like the sun in the heavens. It is one sun; yet it is enough for every one, it is free to every one. You open your eye and enjoy its beams without asking any questions. Again, it is a righteousness which is “upon all them that believe.” It is “unto all”; but it is only “upon” them that believe. The moment that we believe through grace we are accepted in the Beloved, redeemed from condemnation and from wrath. Again, the apostle affirms, regarding this righteousness for the unrighteous, that “there is no difference: for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” There is no difference as to its fitness for the sinner, whatever his sin may be; and there is no difference as to the fitness of the sinner for the righteousness. There is this twofold fitness: the fitness of the righteousness for the sinner, and the fitness of the sinner for the righteousness. There is no question as to the kind of your unrighteousness, the length of time, the amount or degree—there is no question about that: the simple question is, Are you an unrighteous man? Then it suits your case. And it is a righteousness near to each one of you; it is not afar off; it is not in heaven above, so that you have to climb to the seat of God to obtain it; and it is not down so low that you must dig to earth’s centre to find it: it is near, it is at your very side; and if you reject it, it cannot be because of its distance. God has brought it near.—H. Bonar.

Rom_3:24. Justification an act of God’s free grace.—Justified by grace—i.e., God’s part; not by blood—i.e., Christ’s part (Rom_5:9); not even by faith—i.e., man’s part (Rom_5:1); still less by works—i.e., the proof and manifestation of all the rest (Jas_2:24). Justification is contemplated from the side of God.

I. Justification itself.—“Being justified.” Rome versus Geneva—the former tending to the view that justification includes the removal of sin, not simply the removal of condemnation, as held by the latter. The structure of this epistle seems to favour the latter. The apostle begins with chaps. 1–5, discussing that awful liability to punishment which rests on Jew and Gentile alike; and only when this is disposed of does he come in chaps. 6–8 to treat of the removal of sin and the gift of eternal life. God comes first as a judge to pardon or absolve, and His second act is that of the Spirit imparting the regenerating seed of spiritual life. Justification is a change of relations, not of nature.

II. Modifications of the principal idea.—

1. The source—in the grace of God: “being justified freely by His grace.” Grace is love stooping, love in action—love manifesting itself to man; but love is eternal, therefore the revealed righteousness will endure. This is the key to the apostle’s confidence.

2. The mode—“freely.” Justification not of works, therefore not of wages; but of grace, therefore a free gift. This fathoms at once the sinner’s helplessness, and exhibits the divine munificence. The helplessness is spiritual—not necessarily mental, or even moral. Man may learn, know, hate, love; but he cannot justify himself in the sight of God. The divine munificence is twofold. The free gift is not dependent on any human return, and in itself is the pledge of all other spiritual blessings.

3. The means—“through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” Redemption is another word that looks at justification from the divine side. It contains two ideas—ransom paid in vindication of justice and righteousness, and liberation effected for the guilty party. The two combined give the principle of substitution. The price was His “blood,” therefore not “without price,” not freely to Him. And it is “in Christ Jesus”—in Him in that historical sense in which in His own body on the tree the propitiation for sin was offered; and in Him in this legal and substitutionary sense in which justification is ours, only as we are treated in the Saviour’s place and accepted as righteous in Him. We are justified by grace—i.e., the source; by blood—i.e., the channel; by faith—i.e., the reception; by works—i.e., the fruit. “By their fruits ye shall know them.”—John Adams, B.D.

Law cannot justify.—“Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight,” etc. How shall man be just before God? Wherewith shall I come before the Lord? Such questions have presented themselves to men ever since sin found an entrance into this world. Such questions demand an answer now. Let us not shrink from considering them.

I. The very essence of God’s nature is holiness.—The outcome of holiness in effect and action is righteousness; hence God, perfectly righteous Himself, requires righteousness in His rational creatures. To come before God with acceptance we must have righteousness; and righteousness is obeying God’s law—and obeying it perfectly—for God admits of no imperfection.

II. What then is our condition as regards the law of God.—

1. The law condemns us, for we have not perfectly obeyed it. Nay, our very best actions are so mixed with imperfections that they come short of what God’s holiness requires. Every one who thinks with any seriousness of God and of himself—God in His holiness, I in my sins—must necessarily ask, What must I do? how can I escape condemnation? how can I be righteous?

2. Shall we then turn again to God’s law—try to keep it more perfectly, leave off sinning, seek righteousness by our own doings? Vain efforts! The more we try, the more plainly we shall see our failures. By the law is the knowledge of sin, but no righteousness for man. Man, left to deal with God’s law with his own efforts alone, either falls into spiritual blindness and deadness of heart, or betakes him to some vain superstition to bring peace to his conscience before God, which they never can bestow.

III. The gospel of Jesus Christ proclaims the way in which man can be justified.—Accounted righteous before God.

1. This is not by the law. God cannot forgo the claims of His law, cannot clear the guilty.

2. But the gospel does for us what the law cannot do.

3. The Lord Jesus, made man for us, standing in our place, bearing our sins, rendering a perfect obedience to the law as man, has redeemed us from the just condemnation of the law.

4. He is declared in the language of prophecy to be “Jehovah our righteousness” (Jer_23:6). All that believe in Him are justified—they have a righteousness given to them by God. They are even said to “be made the righteousness of God” in Christ (2Co_5:21).

IV. By this marvellous work of God, wrought out for us in and by the Lord Jesus, the most blessed results ensue.—

1. All God’s glorious attributes shine forth. His holiness is vindicateu, His justice satisfied, His law honoured, His love triumphant. The glorious contradiction of Exo_34:6 finds its blessed solution: “Forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty.” Christ taking the place of the guilty—the believer’s sins forgiven.

2. Hence God can be just, and yet justify the ungodly. Hence He is not only merciful, but “faithful and just to forgive us our sins” (1Jn_1:9).

V. This great gospel truth of justification by faith in Christ, almost lost in the visible Church in the times of mediæval darkness, but recovered and proclaimed anew in the Reformation, is now in the opened Scriptures set full in view for us. Let us receive it, hold it fast, rejoice in it, and let us prove in our own life that it is a doctrine according to godliness.—Dr. Jacob.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom_3:21-26

Salvation undeserved.—Here we have an answer to the most important of all inquiries, “How shall man be just with God?” To be justified is to be acquitted from the charge brought against us, and absolved from the condemnation with which we were threatened. With regard to us the condemnation was deserved and the charge was true. This renders the case so difficult and peculiar, and calls for the apostle’s development. But, in exposing the source of the privilege, he seems to use a tautology: “Being justified freely by His grace.” If it be done freely, it must be of grace; and if it be gracious, it must be free. Yet this is not saying too much. Paul knew that men were proud and vain, and that as Simon Magus thought of purchasing the Holy Ghost with money, so they, in dealing with God about their souls, wish to be merchants rather than suppliants, and would seem to buy while they are compelled to beg. But surely, if it be saying too much, it is saying enough. Surely, after this, the freeness and graciousness of the thing cannot be questioned; it is not only free and gracious as opposed to constraint, but as opposed to worthiness. Merit in a sinner is impossible—his desert lies all on the other side. There he is worthy of death. A man who asks a favour may have no claim upon you; but you may also have no demand upon him, and therefore, though you may justly refuse him, yet you have no right to apprehend and punish him. But God had a right to punish us, and it is of His mercies that we are not consumed. It is also free and gracious as opposed to desire. This is undeniable with regard to the constitution and accomplishment of the plan itself, for these long preceded even our being; but is it true with regard to the application of it? The publican prayed, “God be merciful to me a sinner,” and went down to his house justified. And you sought and found. But what induced you to seek? A sense of your want of the blessing. But how came you to feel this after being so long insensible of it? Hearing such a preacher. But who made this preacher, and sent him, and placed him in your way, and applied what he said to your heart? And the same may be asked with regard to any other instrumentality. Go as far back as you please, when you arrive you will find Him there before you, with all His preparations and excitements, and will hear Him say as you approach, “Come, for all things are now ready.”—W. Jay.

Mistaken view of cause.—A commentator on this chapter gives six causes of justification.

I. The principal cause.—The love of God the Father.

II. The meritorious cause.—The active and passive obedience of the Son.

III. The efficient cause.—The operation of the Holy Ghost.

IV. The instrumental cause.—The ministry of the word and the sacraments.

V. The instrumental cause for the reception on our part.—Faith in Christ’s blood.

VI.—The final cause.-—Eternal life by virtue and holiness.

Now with all due deference this appears to be a strange jumbling of causes, and even the schoolmen could not have gone any further. John Stuart Mill was not a theologian, perhaps a sceptic, but he was an able logician, and he teaches us to distinguish between the cause and the antecedent; and in the case of these six causes we should say that a distinction should be observed between the cause and both the antecedent and the consequent. Some of these so-called causes are no causes. They are not even antecedents, but consequents. How can the final cause be an antecedent of justification? Virtue and holiness come after justification. They are its blessed results, the effects of that sanctifying process which is being carried on in the justified. If the ministry of the word and the sacraments be the instrumental cause of justification, then the Saviour’s mediatorial work is not complete. The Twenty-fifth Article of the Church of England does not make the sacraments into a cause of justification: “Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens of Christian men’s profession, but rather they be certain sure witnesses, and effectual signs of grace, and God’s good will toward us, by the which He doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken but also strengthen and confirm our faith in Him.” The Christian man is surely a justified man, and the sacraments are tokens of his profession. If the sacraments are a cause of justification, then the article on justification by faith must be altered, for it says, “We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings.”

The propitiation.—“Freely.” The word “excludes merit,” says Hemming—“not Christ’s indeed, but ours.” “It excludes,” says Aquinas, “the merit of preceding works.” “It excludes more,” says Berga; “it excludes the works that come after faith, as well as the works that go before it.” If the justification be gratuitous on the part of God, it must be to man “without money and without price.” It would no longer be a gift to believers if they purchased or deserved it by their merit. Luther translates the word “without merit” (ohne Verdienst). So does Sharpe. Bellarmin explains it admirably, so far as its theology is concerned, “out of His mere liberality.” Limborch explains it happily, so far as its philology is concerned, as meaning donatitie. So far, then, as we can learn anything from the New Testament usage of the compound term employed by the apostle, we have reason to come to the conclusion that, in the passage before us, it will not denote, barely and abstractly, simply “deliverance.” It will, indeed, denote “deliverance,” but the “deliverance” referred to will be deliverance “on the ground of something that meets all rightful claims.” It will be, in some legitimate sense, “a purchased deliverance.” It will be, in short, deliverance “on the ground of a ransom.” “There is perhaps,” says Dr. Chalmers, “no single passage in the book of inspiration which reveals, in a way so formal and authoritative as the one before us, the path of transition by which a sinner passes from a state of wrath to a state of acceptance. There is no passage—to which, if we would only bring the docility and the compliance of childhood—that is more fitted to guide and to turn an inquiring sinner into the way of peace.” “These six verses,” says C. P. Shepherd, “which contain the first enunciation of the doctrine of justification in this epistle—the first overflow, so to speak, of that matter of which the apostle’s heart and mind were full—contain also in a short compass the completest expression of the Christian doctrine.” If Christ Jesus be set forth as “propitiatory,” then it must be true that He was set forth as a “propitiator,” and set forth as a “propitiation,” and set forth as a “propitiatory sacrifice,” and set forth too as the “antitypical fulfilment of all the symbols of propitiation” that “were divinely instituted under preceding dispensations.” It was Christ Himself, in His theanthropic personality, that was thus “propitiatory.” He was, in His intermingled “satisfactio” and “satispassio,” the meritorious cause of God’s relation of propitiousness to the human family. It is in consideration of His propitiation that God, as the moral governor of the universe, is willing and is ready to forgive and to justify all such of the “ungodly” as will be induced to take up, by means of faith in the propitiator, that one mental position that will insure their voluntary reception of such divine influences as are needed to renew the heart and assimilate the characters to the archetypal character of God.—Dr. Morrison.

Justice and mercy.—The following passage taken in connection with others of a similar character naturally excites a little surprise: “High above all they imagine a great, grim, and relentless justice ever ready to sweep down and crush men out of existence. Long ago this would have happened, men would have been destroyed, the whole universe would have been consumed in wrath, were it not that this great and terrible Judge was pled with, restrained, forcibly held back by the struggling form of an equally powerful mercy. At last Christ appeared; He brings with Him a grand expedient, appeases justice, reconciles it to mercy, and mercy, freed from the conflict and no longer alarmed for men, goes forth and takes up its mission to save. It is not in the writings of the apostle, nor in the writings of any of the sacred penmen, that ideas like these are to be found. They are to be found, not there, but in the books and pictures of mediæval and modern theologians.” We also affirm that such ideas as these are not to be found in the books of modern theologians. If they are, the books are not much read, and therefore it is scarcely worth while to quote them for the sake of refutation. The book would be regarded as a curiosity which contained such teaching. At first sight we are disposed to look with compassion upon the “struggling form” of pleading mercy; but our compassion is turned into wonder when we find that mercy is “equally powerful” with justice. Surely any person capable of writing a book on theology would see that there could be no end to the conflict between two infinitely powerful persons or attributes such as justice and mercy—the one determined to punish and the other to pardon. Equally powerful, the contest would be equal; and on what principle Christ could appear with His “grand expedient” to the settlement of this awful struggle we cannot understand. The appropriateness of the adjectives “grim” and “relentless” when applied to justice may be fairly questioned. The breakers of law, the hardened and impenitent despisers of authority, may be expected to look upon justice as grim; but shall we expect law expounders and enforcers to take this view? It certainly does not seem to us fitting that justice and mercy should be represented as two beings in deadly conflict, as descriptive of the divine procedure; for there can be no violent opposition among the attributes of the Godhead. All work together in harmony. We cannot see anything grotesque in the proceeding when God’s mercy is inclined to save, and when God sees it proper to have regard to the interests of His moral government, and devises a method whereby He may be just and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 3

Rom_3:23. Pharisaism.—When the late Rev. George Burder, of London, was preaching at Warwick, he was called to attend the execution of three men, one a coiner, and the other two housebreakers. “One circumstance,” says Mr. B., “affected me very deeply. All the men were on ladders, then the mode of execution, with the ropes about their necks, about to be turned off, when the coiner, endeavouring to fortify his mind in this awful situation, uttered words to this purpose, which I distinctly heard, being at a short distance, ‘I never killed anybody; I never hurt anybody: I hope the Lord will have mercy upon me.’ This poor creature seemed nearly to die in the spirit of the Pharisee, ‘I thank God I am not as other men are, or as this publican,’ for I thought he alluded to the two thieves suffering with him. I was so deeply affected that I could scarcely refrain from crying out to the man, ‘Do not trust in your own righteousness: look to Christ.’ This has often occurred to me as one of the most glaring instances of a self-righteous spirit that I ever knew.”

Rom_3:25. Propitiation.—Cowper, the poet, speaking of his religious experience, says, “But the happy period which was to shake off my fetters and 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 twenty-fifth of the third of Romans: ‘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, 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. In a moment I believed, and received the gospel. Whatever my friend Madan had said to me so long before revived in all its clearness, with demonstration of the Spirit, and with power.”

Rom_3:26. One man loses blood to save another.—The other day a man allowed two ounces of blood to be extracted for the purpose of being infused into an invalid. The loss of blood was more than he could bear. The man died as a consequence of the sacrifice. The offering, if not the death, was voluntary. He was not compelled to the suffering. And so Jesus freely offered Himself. He could have paralysed the arm of the Roman soldier that was raised to pierce His sacred side. Even after the wound was made He could have spoken the word of healing; but then the stream would not have flowed for the healing of the nations. Yea, after He had freely undertaken the work of our redemption, He might have stopped short and secured to Himself a glorious body-guard of more than twelve legions of angels. But His love both to God and to man sustained Him in the mighty conflict.

Rom_3:26. Eli believes the sad tidings.—The power which resides in a word, or which operates through a word, requires one (and no more than one) condition for its operation—it must be believed. Old Eli, bowed with the weight of years, sat in the city gate of Shiloh, when a message came to him which had in it a power of death. But if Eli had not believed the fatal tidings of that Benjamite who professed to report the disastrous issue of the day’s engagement, Eli would not have fallen dead in a fit by the side of the gate. The message which another Benjamite spoke at midnight to the Roman jailor had in it, on the contrary, a power of spiritual life. But if that jailor had not received Paul’s record of God concerning His Son, no life could have visited his rude, dark, heathen soul. Faith is no exceptional demand on the gospel’s part. It is the condition of all power which comes by word, whether it be a word that teaches or a word that commands. Though the power of God, operating through His gospel, is an exceptional power, since it is the direct energy of the Holy Ghost which quickens dead souls, yet God has chosen this particular vehicle of speech for His life-giving, saving, spiritual energy, and having chosen it, He respects its ordinary laws. Salvation must come by faith, because faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.—Dykes.

Rom_3:26. Zaleucus.—Zaleucus, the ancient legislator, shared the punishment with his son, and submitted to lose one eye so that his son might not be rendered totally blind, which was the legal penalty for his transgression. Zaleucus, being both legislator and father, devised the method and endured the suffering, so that law might not be dishonoured and that fatherly love might be expressed. It would be an easy task to describe, after the manner of some writers, the contest between the grim, relentless king and the loving father. We might draw a picture that the heroic Zaleucus would not be able to recognise. He did not become three by the transaction. The ego did not stand by as a calm spectator, while the legislator and the father fought out the affair on the fertile plains of the Locri. The stern legislator and the loving father made up the one Zaleucus. The feeling of love and the sense of justice are not separate from but form a part of my personality. Justice, love, and mercy are not personalities standing away from, though still surrounding, the divine Being. They are the essential attributes of a perfect and full-orbed Deity, and are in subjection to the deliberative faculty. Above them is the great divine consciousness speaking after the manner of men. There can be no fierce conflict among the divine attributes. There never was the represented struggle. All work together in blessed harmony. A man may consult with himself; but he does not get into fierce conflict with himself, as he might if consulting with his fellows. And so even God may consult with Himself. We fail to see anything grotesque in the proceeding when God’s mercy is inclined to save, and God, deeming it proper to have regard to the interests of His moral government, devises a method whereby He may be just and yet the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

Sixth Section.—The revelation of God’s righteousness without the law by faith in Christ for all sinners without distinction, by the representation of Christ as the Propitiator (“mercy-seat”). The righteousness of God in Christ as justifying righteousness.

Rom_3:21-26

Seventh Section—The annulling of man’s vain-glory (self-praise) by the law of faith. Justification by faith without the deeds of the law. First proof: from experience: God is the God of the Gentiles as well as of the Jews—proved by the actual faith of the Gentiles. True renewal of the law by faith.

Rom_3:27-31

21But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested [But now, apart from the law,46 the righteousness of God hath been made manifest47], being 22witnessed [testified to, attested] by the law and the prophets; Even48 the righteousness of God which is by [by means of, through] faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all49 them that believe; for there is no difference: 23For all have sinned [all sinned, i.e., they are all sinners],50 and come [fall] short [ὑστεροῦνται, in the present tense] of the glory of God; 24Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 25Whom God hath [omit hath] set forth [προέθετο] to be a propitiation [mercy-seat]51 through [the52] faith [,] in his blood, to declare [for a manifestation (exhibition) of, εἰς ἔνδειξιν τῆς διχ.] his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past [because of the prætermission (non-visitation, passing by) of the former sins, διὰ τὴν (not τῆς) πάρεσιν (not τῆς) πάρεσιν]53 through [in, ἐν] the forbearance 26of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus [with a view to the manifestation (exhibition, πρὸς τὴν54 ἔςδειξιν) of his righteousness at this present time, in order that he may be (shown and seen to be) just and (yet at the same time) be justifying him who is of the faith of (in) Jesus, εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν δίχδιον χαὶ διχιοῦντα τὸν ἐχ πίστεως ̓ Ιησοῦ].55

27Where is [the] boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? [By the law] 8of works? Nay; but by the law of faith. Therefore [For]56 we conclude [judge] that a man is justified by faith57 without the deeds [without 29works] of the law.58 [Or, ἤ] Is he the God of the Jews only?59 is he not also 30of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: Seeing60 it is one God, which shall [who will] justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. 31Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: [Far be it!] yea, we establish61 the law.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

First Paragraph, Rom_3:21-26

Contrast between the saving time of justification and the old time of sin and death.

Rom_3:21. But now, νυνὶδέ.—Explanations of νυνί: 1. Contrast of times [at this time, under the gospel dispensation, = ἐν τῶ νῦν χαιρῶ, Rom_3:26]; (Grotius, Tholuck, Philippi [Olshausen, Wordsworth, Hodge], and others); 2. contrast of circumstances [as things are]: earlier dependence on the law, now independence of the law [διὰ νόμου—χωρὶς νόμου], (Pareus, Piscat., Meyer, De Wette [Fritzsche, Alford. In this sense the classics use only νῦν, not νυνί, but the latter is so used repeatedly in Hellenistic Greek]); 3. in soteriology the two contrasts of time and condition coincide.—Apart from the law [of Moses, χωρὶς νόμου]: 1. It is referred to πεφανέρωται (Luther, Tholuck, Meyer, and others); 2. to διχαιοσύνη (Augustine, Wolf [Reiche, Hodge], and others): the righteousness of God which the believer shares without the law [or rather, without works of the law, χωρὶς ἔργωνν όμου, Gal_2:16]. The latter view is not correct. [Comp. διὰ νομου in Rom_3:20, which likewise belongs not to the noun ἐπίγνωσις, but to the verb to be supplied. Also Text. Note1.—P. S.]

[The righteousness of God. Comp. the Exeg. Notes on Rom_1:17. It is the righteousness which proceeds from God (gen. auctoris), which personally appeared in Christ, “who is our Righteousness,” and which is communicated to the believer for Christ’s sake in the act of justification by faith. It is both objective, or inherent in God and realized in Christ, and subjective, or imparted to man. It is here characterized by a series of antitheses: independent of the law, yet authenticated by the law and the prophets (Rom_3:21); freely (δωρεάν) bestowed on the believer, yet fully paid for by the redemption price (διὰ τῆς ἀπολυτρώσεως) of Christ (24); intrinsically holy, yet justifying the sinner (26); thus uniting the character of the moral governor of the universe, and the merciful Father who provided a free salvation.—P. S.]

Has been made manifest, πεφανέρωται. This is now the complete revelation of righteousness; as Joh_1:17 represents the complete revelation of grace and truth; and as Eph_1:19 represents the complete revelation of omnipotence. All are single definitions of the completed New Testament revelation itself. The expression does not absolutely presuppose “the previous concealment in God’s council” (Meyer).62 For the Old Testament was the increasing revelation of God, also in reference to righteousness. But compared with this completeness, the growing revelation was still as a veil.—Being testified to [μαρτυρουμένη, put first with reference to χωρὶς νόμου, which it qualifies] by the law and the prophets [i.e., the Old Testament Scriptures; Mat_5:17; Mat_7:12; Mat_22:40, &c.; just as we now say the Bible. νόμου has here, as Bengel remarks, a wider sense than in the preceding χωρὶς νόμου.—P. S.] There is therefore no contradiction between the Old and New Testaments. The Old Testament is in substance a prophetic witness of the New, and therefore also of the righteousness of faith (see chap. 4., and Rom_10:6; Act_10:43; chap. 15). And not only do the prophets (Isa_28:16; Hab_2:4) testify to this righteousness, but so does the law also in its stricter sense (the patriarchs, &c.); yea, even its strictest sense; for example, the law of the sin-offering (Leviticus 16). [Augustine: Novum Testamentum in Vetere latet; Vetus T. in Novo patet. See the proof in chap. 4 from the case of Abraham and the declarations of David.—P. S.]

Rom_3:22. Through faith of Jesus Christ.63 The usual explanation is, through faith in Jesus Christ [genitive of the object].64 Meyer produces in its favor the usage of language (Mar_11:22; Act_3:16; Gal_2:20; Gal_3:22; Eph_3:12, &c.), as well as the essential relation of the πίστις; to the διχαιοσύνη. [These parallel passages, to which may be added Gal_2:16; Eph_4:13; Php_3:9; Jam_2:1; Rev_14:12, seem to me conclusive in favor of the usual interpretation that our faith in Christ is meant here; comp. also τὸν ἐχ πίστεως Ιησοῦ, Rom_3:26. But Dr. Lange strongly fortifies his new interpretation: Christ’s faithfulness, to us, taking Ἰησοῦ Χριστο ῦ as the genitive of the subject.—P. S.] The explanation of Benecke, the faithfulness of Christ, is overlooked even by Tholuck. We make it, Christ’s believing faithfulness [Glaubenstreue]. Reasons: 1. The πίστις θεοῦ (Rom_3:3), and the coherency of the ideas, πιστεύεσθαι, πιστεύειν, and πίστις θεοῦ, in opposition to the ideas: ἀπιστέω, ἀπιστία, and corresponding with the ideas: righteousness of God, righteousness of Christ, righteousness by faith. 2. The addition in this passage of εἰς πάντας χαὶ πάντας χαὶ επὶ πάντας; with which we must compare Rom_1:17, ἐξ πίστεως. 3. The passages, Gal_3:22; Eph_3:12; comp. Heb_12:2. As to His knowledge, Christ of course did not walk by faith, but by sight; but as regards the moral principle of faith—confidence and faithfulness—He is the Prince of faith. 4. We cannot say of the righteousness of God, that it was first revealed by faith in Christ. The revelation of God’s righteousness in the faithfulness of Christ is the ground of justifying faith, but faith is not the ground of this Revelation 5. So also the διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν τῶ αὐτοῦ αἵματι, Rom_3:25, cannot be regarded as substantiating the ἱλαστήριον.

Unto all and upon all.. The εἰς denotes the direction, the ideal dynamic determination of the διχαιοσύνη; the ἐπὶ, the fulfilment, the appropriation. [This must, of course, not be understood in a Universalistic sense. See Textual Note4.—P. S.] Both prepositions have been combined in various ways as identical, and explained as strengthening the thought for all (thus Rückert, and others); on the contrary, Theodoret, Œcumenius, and others, have arbitrarily referred εἰς to the Jews, and ἐπί to the Gentiles; according to Morus, and others, χαὶ ἐπί, &c., is construed as a further explanation of the εἰς πάντας.

For there is no difference. On account of γάρ, this clause refers to the former. There is neither a difference between Jews and Gentiles, nor, in reference to the necessity of justification, is there a difference between those who have shown themselves, according to Rom_2:7 ff., doers or transgressors of the law.

Rom_3:23. For all sinned [they are all sinners; Luther: sie sind allzumal Sünder]. They sinned, in the sense that they have become sinners. Therefore aor. (II.), and not perfect. They sinned in such a way that they are still sinning.65 But their righteousness was altogether lost when their transgression began.—And fall short of the glory [ὑστεροῦνται, in the present tense. All sinned, and consequently they come short]. τῆς δόξης. Explanations: 1. Glorying before God, gloriatio66 (Erasmus, Luther, Rosenmüller and others). 2. The δόξα θεοῦ as the image of God (Flacius, Chemnitz, Rückert, Olshausen; see 1Co_11:7). 3. The glory of eternal life [as in Rom_3:2], (Œcumenius, Glöckler, &c., Beza, Bengel, as sharing in the glory of God). 4. Honor before God, i.e., in the estimation of God (Calvin [gloria quœ coram Deo locum habet], Köllner). 5. The honor which God gives, i.e., the approbation of God (the genit. auct.); Piscat., Grotius, Philippi, Meyer [Fritzsche, De Wette, Alford, Hodge]. Tholuck: The declaration of honor, like the declaration of righteousness.67 This would give the strange sense: because they lack the declaration of righteousness on the part of God, they are to be declared righteous. It must not be overlooked that men belong here who, as inward Jews, according to Rom_2:29, have already ἔπαινος ἐχθεοῦ. Certainly, the question is concerning righteousness before God, because the question concerns God’s judicial tribunal. But what men were wanting since Adam’s fall, is not the righteousness of justification—for it is by this that that want is to be supplied—but the righteousness of life (not to be confounded with the righteousness by the works of the law), as the true glory or radiance of life [δόξα in the sense of splendor, majesty, perfection, Lange translates it: Gerechtigkeitsglanz, Lebensruhm.—P. S.]. But as the διχαιοσύνη of man must come from the διχαιοσύνη of God in order to avail before Him, so also the δόξα. Therefore the alternative, from God or before God, is a wrong alternative.68 But the supply is equal to the want: the διχαιοσύνη of Christ becomes the διχαιοσύνη of the believer, and therefore Christ’s δόξα his δόξα (Romans 8).69

Rom_3:24. Being justified freely.70. The participle διχαιούμενοι, in connection with what follows, specifies both the mode by which their want of Divine δόξα becomes perfectly manifest, and the opposite which comes to supply this want. The διχαιοῦσθαι does not merely come to supply the want of glory (according to Luther’s translation: and are justified [Peshito, Fritzsche, = χαὶ διχαιοῦνται]), but by the διχαιοῦσθαι, the fact of that ὑστεροῦσθαι becomes perfectly apparent. The individual judgment and the individual deliverance are, in fact, joined into one: repentance and faith; hunger and thirst after righteousness, and fulness.

[Note on the Scripture meaning of διχαιόω.—Διχαιούμενοι depends grammatically on ὑστεροῦνται, but contains in fact the main idea: ut qui justificentur (Beza, Tholuck, Meyer). This is the locus classicus of the doctrine of justification by free grace through faith in Christ, in its inseparable connection with the atonement, as its objective basis. The verb διχαιόω occurs forty times in the New Testament (twice in Matthew, five times in Luke, twice in Acts, twenty-seven times in Paul’s Epistles, three times in James, once in the Apocalypse. In the Gospel and Epistles of John, as also in Peter and James, the verb never occurs, although they repeatedly use the noun διχαιοσύνη and the adjective δίχαιος). It must be taken here, as nearly always in the Bible, in the declaratory, forensic or judicial sense, as distinct from, though by no means opposed to, or abstractly separated from, a mere executive act of pardoning, and an efficient act of making just inwardly or sanctifying. It denotes an act of jurisdiction, the pronouncing of a sentence, not the infusion of a quality. This is the prevailing Hellenistic usage, corresponding to the Hebrew הִצְדִּיק. Comp., for the Old Testament, the Septuagint in Gen_38:26; Gen_44:16; Exo_23:7 (οὐδιχαιώσεις); Deu_25:1; 2Sa_15:4; 1Ki_8:32; Psa_82:3; Pro_17:15; Isa_5:23; for the New Testament, Mat_12:37; Luk_10:29; Luk_16:15; Luk_18:14 (where δεδιχαιωμένος evidently refers to the publican’s prayer for forgiveness of sin); Act_13:39; Rom_2:13; Rom_3:4; Rom_3:20; Rom_3:24; Rom_3:26; Rom_3:28; Rom_3:30; Rom_4:2; Rom_4:5; v. 1, 9; Rom_8:30; Rom_8:33; 1Co_4:4; 1Co_6:11; Gal_2:16-17; Gal_3:8; Gal_3:11; Gal_3:24; Gal_5:4; Tit_3:7; Jam_2:21-25; Rev_22:11. There is, to my knowledge, no passage in the New Testament, and only two or three in the Septuagint (Psa_73:13 : ἐδιχαίωσα τὴν χαρδίαν; Isa_53:11 :διχαιῶσαι δίχαιον; comp. Dan_12:3 : מַצְדִּיקֵי הָרַבִּים), where διχαιόω means to make just, or, to lead to righteousness. The declarative sense is especially apparent in those passages where man is said to justify God, who is just, and cannot be made just, but only accounted and acknowledged as just; Luk_7:29; Luk_7:35; Mat_11:19; Rom_3:4 (from Psa_51:5); comp. also 1Ti_3:16, where Christ is said to be justified in spirit.

The declarative and forensic meaning of the phrase, διχαιοῦσθαι, may be proven (1) from the opposite phrase, διχαιοῦσθαι ἐχ νόμου, which is equivalent to διχαιοῦσθαι παρὰ τῶ θεῶεν νόμῳ, Gal_3:11 (or ἐξ ἔργων νόμου, Gal_3:10), or ἐνώπιοναὐτοῦ, Rom_3:20; i.e., to be justified in the sight or in the judgment of God; (2) from the term λογίζειν εἰς διχαιοσύνην, to account for righteous, which is used in the same sense as διχαιοῦν, Rom_4:3; Rom_4:5; Rom_4:9; Rom_4:23-24; Gal_3:6; Jam_2:23, and is almost equivalent with σώζειν, to save (comp. Rom_5:9-10; Rom_10:9-10; Rom_10:13; Eph_2:5 ff.); (3) from the use of the opposite word to condemn, e.g., Pro_17:15 : “He that justifieth (מַּצְדִּיק, LXX.: δίχαιον χρίνει) the wicked, and he that condemneth (מַרְשִׁשִׁיעַ) the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord,” in the translation of the Vulgate: “Qui justificat impium et qui condemnat justum, abominabilis est uterque apud Deum.” He who would implant righteousness in a wicked man, or lead him into the way of righteousness, would doubtless be acceptable to God. So also Mat_12:37 : “By thy words shalt thou be justified (διχαιωθήσῃ), and by thy words thou shalt be condemned (χαταδιχασθήσῃ).

The corresponding noun, διχαίωσις (which occurs only twice in the New Testament, viz., Rom_4:25; Rom_5:18), justification (Rechtfertigung), is the opposite of χατάχριμα, condemnation; comp. Mat_12:37; Rom_8:1; Rom_8:33-34; hence the antithesis of χρῖμα είς διχαίωσιν and χρῖμα εἰς χατάχριμα, Rom_5:16; Rom_5:18. Justification implies, negatively, the remission of sins (ἄφεσις τῶν ἁμαρτιᾶν), and, positively, the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, or the adoption (υἱοθεσία, Gal_4:5; Eph_1:5).

No human being can so keep the law of God, which demands perfect love to Him and to our neighbor, that on the ground of his own works he could ever be declared righteous before the tribunal of a holy God. He can only be so justified freely, without any merit of his own, on the objective ground of the perfect righteousness of Christ, as apprehended, and thus made subjective by a living faith, or life-union with Him. This justifying grace precedes every truly good work on our part, but is at the same time the actual beginning of all good works. There is no true holiness except on the ground of the atonement and the remission of sin, and the holiness of the Christian is but a manifestation of love and gratitude for the boundless mercy of God already received and constantly experienced.

This I take to be the true evangelical or Pauline view of justification, in opposition to the interpretation of Roman Catholics and Rationalists, who, from opposite standpoints, agree in taking διχαιόω in the sense of making just, or sanctifying, and in regarding good works as a joint condition, with faith, of progressive justification. The objection that God cannot pronounce a man just if he is not so in fact, has force only against that mechanical and exclusively forensic view which resolves justification into a sort of legal fiction, or a cold, lifeless imputation, and separates it from the broader and deeper doctrine of a life-union of the believer with Christ. Certainly God, unlike any human judge, is absolutely true and infallible; He speaks, and it is done; His declaratory acts are creative, efficient acts. But mark, the sinner is not justified outside of Christ, but only in Christ, on the ground of His perfect sacrifice, and on condition of true faith, by which he actually becomes one with Christ, and a partaker of His holy life. So, when God declares him righteous, he is righteous potentially, “a new creature in Christ;” old things having passed away, and all things having become new (1Co_5:7). And God, who sees the end from the beginning, sees also the full-grown fruit in the germ, and by His gracious promise assures its growth. Justifying faith is itself a work of Divine grace in us, and the fruitful source of all our good works. On the part of God, then, and in point of fact, the actus declaratorius can indeed not be abstractly separated from the actus efficiens: the same grace which justifies, does also renew, regenerate, and sanctify; faith and love, justification and sanctification, are as inseparable in the life of the Christian, as light and heat in the rays of the sun. “When God doth justify the ungodly,” says Owen (on Justification, vol. v. p. 127, Goold’s ed.), “on account of the righteousness imputed unto him, He doth at the same instant, by the power of His grace, make him inherently and subjectively righteous, or holy.” Nevertheless, we must distinguish in the order of logic. Justification, like regeneration (which is the corresponding and simultaneous or preceding inner operation of the Holy Spirit), is a single act, sanctification a continuous process; they are related to each other like birth and growth; justification, moreover, depends not at all on what man is or has done, but on what Christ has done for us in our nature; and, finally, good works are no cause or condition, but a consequence and manifestation of justification. Comp. Doctrinal and Ethical, No. 5, below; also the Exeg. Notes on Rom_1:17; Rom_2:13; Rom_3:20.—P. S.]

Freely. δωρεάν, as a gift, gratis, not by merit (Rom_4:4; comp. 2Th_3:8). [Comp. also ἡδωρεὰ τῆς διχαιοσύνης, Rom_5:17, and θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον, Eph_2:3.—P. S.]—By his grace. The idea of grace denotes the union of God’s love and righteousness, the highest manifestation of His favor, which, by its voluntary operation, as love, destroys the sinner’s guilt freely, and which, as righteousness, destroys the guilt on conditions of justice. [Grace—i.e., God’s love to the sinner, saving love, is the efficient cause, redemption by the blood of Christ the objective means, faith the subjective condition, of justification αὐτοῦ is emphatically put before χάριτι. Justification on the part of God is an act of pure grace (Eph_2:8-10; Gal_2:21), and χάρις is the very opposite of μισθὸς ἔργων or ὀφείλημα (Rom_4:4; Rom_11:6). Faith, on our part, is not a meritorious act, but simply the acceptance and appropriation of God’s free gift, and is itself wrought in us by God’s Spirit, without whom no one can call Jesus Lord (1Co_12:3).—P. S.]

Through the redemption, ἀπολύτρωσις. The grace of God is marked as the causality of this ἀπολύτρωσις. This is therefore to be regarded here as the most general view of the fact of redemption, as is also plain from the addition, τῆςἐν Χ.’ Ι. [in Christ, not through Christ; comp. Eph_1:7; ἐν ᾧ ἔχομεν τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν διὰ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ]. The ἀπολύτρωσις, or redemption,71 in the wider sense, and viewed as a fundamental and accomplished fact, comprehends: 1. χαταλλαγή [change from enmity to friendship, reconciliation], Rom_5:10; 2Co_5:18 : freedom from the enmity and rancor of sin. 2. ἱλασμός [propitiation, expiation], 2Co_5:14; Rom_3:21; Gal_3:13 [ἐξηγόρασεν ἐχ τῆς χατάρας τοῦ νόμου]; Eph_1:7 [τὴναπολύτρωσιν ... τὴν ἄφεσιν τῶν παραπτωμάτων]; Col_1:14; Heb_2:17 : freedom from the guilt of sin. 3. ἀπολύτρωσις in the narrower sense, Rom_5:17; Rom_6:2; Rom_6:18; Rom_6:22; Rom_8:2; Rom_8:21; Gal_5:1; Tit_2:14; Heb_2:15; Rom_3:18 : freedom from the dominion of sin. The same ἀπολύτρωσις, viewed in its ultimate aim and effect, means the transposition from the condition of the militant to the triumphant Church: Luk_21:28 [“the day of redemption draweth nigh”]; Rom_8:23; Eph_1:7; Eph_1:14; Eph_4:30. The ίλασμός is justly represented here as the central saving agency of the whole ἀπολύτρωσιζ. [Hodge: Redemption from the wrath of God by the blood of Christ. Philippi, Alford, and others: deliverance from the guilt and punishment of sin by the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ. The one of course implies the other.—P. S.]

Rom_3:25.72 Whom God set forth. Explanations of προέθετο: 1. Previously purposed, designed, decreed (Chrysostom, Œcumenius, Fritzsche [Forbes], and others, with reference to Eph_1:9);73 2. Kypke: substituit, nostro loco dedit. Against the meaning of προτίθημι.74 3. Publicly set forth (Vulgate, Luther, Beza, Bengel, De Wette, Philippi, Meyer, Tholuck [E. V., Alford, Hodge; also Delitzsch, Comm. on Heb., 9:5]). Meyer: “This signification of προτιθημι, well known from the Greek usage (Herod., 3:148; Rom_6:21; Plato’s Phœdr., p. 115, E., &c.), must be decidedly accepted, because of the correlation to εἰς ἔνδειξιν.”75 The peculiar interest of God is indicated by the middle voice. It was manifested through the crucifixion; compare the discourse of Jesus, in John, where He compares Himself with the serpent of Moses; John 376

This explanation acquires its full weight by the following ἱλαστήριον, a substantive of neuter form, made from the adjective ἱλαστήριος, which relates to expiatory acts; see the Lexicons. In the Septuagint especially it is the designation of the mercy-seat, or the lid or cover of the ark, כַּפֹּרֶת, which was sprinkled by the high-priest with the blood of the sin-offering once a year, on the great day of atonement [and over which appeared the shekinah, or δόξα τοῦ χυρίου; Lev_16:13-16; Exo_25:17-22. Comp Bähr: Symbolik des mosaischen Cultus, 1837, vol. i., p. 379 ff., 387 ff., and Lundius, Jüd. Heiligthümer, Hamb. 1711, p. 33 ff.—P. S.]. Besides, the settle, or lower platform [עֲזָרָה] of the altar of burnt-offering [Eze_43:14; Eze_43:17; Eze_43:20] was so named [because the Asarah, like the Capporeth, was to be sprinkled with the blood of atonement, or because it was the platform from which the sin-offering was offered.—P. S.]. See also Exo_25:22, and other places. Explanations: 1. Expiatory sacrifice, sin-offering (Sühnopfer).77 Some supply θῦμα [which, however, is unnecessary, ἱλαστήριον being used as a noun]. (So Clericus, Reiche, De Wette, Köllner, Fritzsche [Meyer, Alford, Conybeare and Howson, Jowett, Wordsworth, Hodge, Ewald]). 2. Means of propitiation [Sühnmittel] (Vulgate: propitiatio; Castellio: placamentum; Morus, Usteri, Rückert).78 3. The mercy-seat, or covering of the ark of the covenant [Origen, Theodoret, Theophylact, Augustine], (Erasmus, Luther, Calvin, Grotius, Calov., Olshausen, Philippi [Tholuck, Forbes]). Against the first exposition it may be urged: (a.) The expiatory offering is not brought to man on God’s part, but man brings it to God by the high-priest (see Philippi)79 (b). The offering is not publicly set forth. (c). The permanence of the operation of the offering requires another expression, and this is Christ crucified as the permanent atonement itself. This sets aside also the second explanation, which, moreover, is too abstract (Meyer). Arguments in favor of the third explanation: (a.) The Septuagint [uniformly] has translated כּפֹּרֶת ἱλαστήριον (Exo_25:18-21, &c. [twenty-six passages according to Fürst’s Hebrew Concordance]).80 (b.) In Heb_9:5, ίλαστήριον means the mercy-seat. (c.) This view is sustained by the idea pervading the whole Epistle, of the contrast between the old worship, which was partly heathen and partly only symbolical, and the real New Testament worship. The verb προέθετο [ad spectandum proponere] likewise favors it.81 As, according to Joh_1:14, the δόξα, or Shekinah, openly appeared in the person of Christ from the secrecy of the Holy of holies, and has dwelt among men, so, according to the present passage, is the ἱλαστήριον set forth from the Holy of holies into the publicity of the whole world for believers. See Zec_13:1; the open fountain. (d.) The ἱλαστήριον unites as symbol the different elements of the atonement. As the covering of the ark of the covenant itself, it is the throne of the divine government of the cherubim above, and the preservation of the law, with its requirements, below. But with the sprinkled blood of expiation, it is a sacrifice offered to God, and therefore the satisfaction for the demands of the divine law below. Also Philo called the covering of the ark of the covenant the symbol of the gracious majesty [ἵλεωδυνάμεως] of God [Vit. Mos., p. 668; comp. Josephus, Antiq. iii. 6, 5.—P. S.].

Meyer [admits that this interpretation agrees with the usage of the word, especially in the LXX., and gives good sense by representing Christ as the anti-typical Capporeth, or mercy-seat; but, nevertheless, he] urges against it the following objections:82 (a.) That ἱλαστήριον is without the article. But this would exclude the antitype, the Old Testament ἱλαστήριον. The requisite articulation is here in ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ αἵματι. [With more reason we might miss ἀληθινόν. Christ may be called our pascha, or the true pascha, or the true mercy-seat, rather than simply pascha or mercy-seat. Yet this is by no means conclusive.—P. S.] (b.) The name, in its application to Christ, is too abrupt. Answer: Since there must be a place of expiation for every expiatory offering, the conceptions of places and offerings of expiation must have been quite familiar to the readers, not merely to the Jews, but also to the Gentiles, although here the idea is connected with the Old Testament symbol. (c.) If Christ should be conceived as Capporeth, then the εἰςἔνδειξιν τῆς διχαὶοσύνης αὐτοῦ would be improper, since the Capporeth must much rather appear as ἔνδειξις of divine grace. This objection rests simply on a defective understanding of the Pauline idea of righteousness (see above). According to Paul, righteousness is not merely condemnatory and putting to death, but, in its perfect revelation, also delivering and quickening. Grace itself is called, on one side, righteousness, on the other, love. (d.) The conception of Christ as the antitype of the mercy-seat nowhere returns in the whole New Testament. Answer: Likewise the types of Christ as the antitype of the brazen serpent (Joh_3:14), and Christ as the curse-offering (Gal_3:13), and others, only occur once. (e.) It has also been objected [but not by Meyer], that the image does not suit, because the covering of the ark and the sprinkling of the blood were two different things. [Hodge: “It is common to speak of the blood of a sacrifice, but not of the blood of the mercy-seat.”] In reply to this, even Meyer observes: Christ is both sacrifice and high-priest.—On the ignorantly contemptuous manner in which Rückert and Fritzsche criticise the proper explanation, see Tholuck. [Fritzsche dismisses this interpretation with a frivolous “valeat absurda explicatio.”—P. S.]

Through faith in his blood [διὰ πίστεω ς, ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ αἵματι]. Different interpretations: 1. By faith on His blood (ἐν instead of εἰς; Luther, Calvin, Beza, Olshausen [Tholuck, Hodge], and others). Although the language will permit this view, the thought is not only obscure, but incorrect, that God, by faith on the blood of Christ, should have made Christ himself the throne of grace for humanity. Faith, in this sense, is a consequens, but not an antecedent, of the established propitiation. 2. The same objection holds good against the construction of Meyer, and others, by which both clauses, διὰ τῆς πίστ. and ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ αἵματι, should refer coördinately to προέθετο; namely, so that faith would be the subjective condition, and the blood of Christ the objective means of the setting forth of Christ as the expiatory offering.83 An objective condition should precede the subjective one, and the propitiation exists before faith, in the sense of the New Testament idea of salvation. Faith is therefore the completed faithfulness of Christ (see Rom_3:22), which, in the blood of His sacrificial death, has become the eternal spiritual manifestation and power for the world. [As in Rom_3:22, I beg leave here to differ from this unusual interpretation of πίστις, and understand this, with other commentators, more naturally of our faith in Christ; comp. τὸν ἐχ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ at the close of Rom_3:26. If it meant the faithfulness of Christ, the Apostle would probably have added αὐτοῦ, as he did before αἵματι. It is better to separate the two classes by a comma after “faith.—The blood of Christ means His holy life offered to God as an expiatory sacrifice for the sins of the world. It is like a healing fountain sending forth streams through the channel of faith to wash away the guilty stains of sin.—P. S.]

For the demonstration of his righteousness [εἰς ἔνδειξιν τῆς διχαιοσύνης αὐτοῦ]. In order to perfectly reveal and establish it. The divergent interpretations of the word διχαιοσύνη indicate how difficult it has been for theology to regard God’s righteousness as grace which produces righteousness. Truthfulness [contrary to the meaning of διχαιοσύνη], (Ambrose, Beza [Turretin, Hammond], and others); goodness (Theodoret, Grotius [Koppe, Reiche, Tittmann], and others); holiness (Neander, Fritzsche [Lipsius]); judicial righteousness (Meyer84 [De Wette, Tholuck, Philippi, Alford, Wordsworth, Hodge]); justifying, or sin-forgiving righteousness (Chrysostom, Augustine, and others); the righteousness which God gives [which would be a superfluous repetition of Rom_3:21, and inconsistent with Rom_3:26,] (Luther, and others); [Stuart, and others: God’s method of justification, which διχαιοσύνη never means.—P. S.]. It is rather the righteousness of God in the fulness of its revelation, as it proceeds from God, requires and accomplishes through Christ the expiation of the law, and institutes the righteousness of faith by justification as the principle of the righteousness of the new life.85 For the righteousness of God, like His truth, omnipotence, and love, forms an unbroken and direct beam from His heart, until it appears in renewed humanity.

Because of (or, on account of) the prætermission (passing over), [i. e., because He had allowed the sins of the race which were committed before Christ’s death to pass by unpunished, whereby His righteousness was obscured, and hence the need of a demonstration or manifestation in the atoning sacrifice, that fully justified the demands of righteousness, and at the same time effected a complete remission of sins, and justification of the sinner.—P. S.]. The πάρεσις must not be confounded with the ἄφεσις, as Cocceius has proved in a special treatise, De utilitate distinctions inter et ἄφεσιν (Opp. t. vii.). [Comp. Textual Note8.] The judicial government of God was not administered in the ante-Christian period, either by the sacrificial fire of the Israelitish theocracy, or by the manifestations of wrath to the old world, both Jews and Gentiles, as a perfect and general judgment. Notwithstanding all the relative punishments and propitiations, God allowed sin, in its full measure, especially in its inward character, to pass unpunished in the preliminary stages of expiation and judgment, until the day of the completed revelation of His righteousness. For this reason, the time of the πάρεσις is denoted as the time of the ἀνοχή. God permitted the Gentiles to walk in their own ways (Psa_81:12; Psa_147:20; Act_14:16); He overlooked, or winked at, the times of this ignorance (Act_17:30). But among the Jews, one of the two goats which was let loose in the wilderness on the great day of atonement, represented symbolically the πἀρεσις (Lev_16:10). This is not only a transcendent fact, but one that is also immanent in the world. The fact that the administrators of the theocracy, in connection with the Gentile world, have crucified Christ, proves the inability of the theocracy to afford a fundamental relief of the world from guilt.86—Of sins previously committed. The sins of the whole world are meant, but as an aggregate of individual sins; because righteousness does not punish sin until it has become manifest and mature in actual individual sins. [Comp. the similar expression, Heb_9:15 : εἰς ἀπολύτρωσιν τῶν ἐπὶ τῇ πρώτῃ διαθήχῃ παραβάσεων. This parallel passage, as well as tile words ἐν τῷ νῦν χαιρῷ, in Rom_3:26, plainly show that the προγεγονότα ἀμαρτήματα are not the sins of each man which precede his conversion (Calov., Mehring, and others), but the sins of all men before the advent, or, more correctly speaking, before the atoning death of Christ. Comp. also Act_15:30 : τοὺς χρόνους τῆς ἀγνοίας ὑπεριδῶν ὁ θεός. Philippi confines the expression to the sins of the Jewish people, in strict conformity to Heb_9:15; but here the Apostle had just proven the universal sinfulness and guilt, and now speaks of the universal redemption of Christ.—P. S.]

Rom_3:25-26. Under the forbearance of God for the demonstration [Unter der Geduld Gottes zu der Erweisung, ἐν τῇ ἀνοχῇ τοῦ θεοῦ, &c.]. Construction: 1. Œcumenius, Luther [Rückert, Ewald, Hodge], and others, refer the ανοχή to προγεγονότων [i.e., committed during the forbearance of God; comp. Act_17:20. This gives good sense, but would require, as Meyer says, a different position of the words, viz., τῶν ἁμαρτ. τῶν προγεγον. ἐν τῇ ἀν τ. θ.—P. S.]. 2. Meyer refers the forbearance to πάρεσις, in consequence of indulgence or toleration, as the ground of the passing over. [So also Philippi]. 3. Reiche: εἰς ἔνδειξιν τῆς διχαιοσύνης; the διχαιοσ. having been manifested partly in the forgiveness of sins, and partly in the delay of punishment. [This implies a wrong view of διὰ and διχαιοσ.; Meyer.—P. S.] 4. We connect the ἀνοχή with the following πρὸς τὴν ἔνδειξιν (Rom_3:26) into one idea,87 and suppose here a brief form of expression, by which προγεγονότων must be again supplied before ἀνοχή. The πἀρεσις must by all means be connected with the ἀνοχή; but it is not operative by virtue of this alone. The πάρεσις denotes the old time as the period of God’s prevailing forbearance, to the end that He may reveal His perfect righteousness in the future decisive time. The πἀρεσις, on the contrary, appeared at that time as the supplement of the propitiatory and retributive judgments which had already commenced as preliminaries. For this reason, the εἰς ἔνδειξιν (Rom_3:25) is not the same as πρὸς τὴν ἔνδειξιν (Rom_3:26). The first ἔνδειξις, as the judicial righteousness revealing itself in the blood of Christ, has supplemented the πάρεσις. The second ἔνδειξις is the purpose of the ἀνοχή, the fully accomplished ἔνδειξις, which branches off in penal righteousness, and in justifying righteousness to him who “is of the faith of Jesus, and draws faith from His fountain of faith.” The εἰς should therefore not be confounded with the πρός (Meyer).88

Rom_3:26. [At this present time, ἐν τῷ νῦν χαιρῷ, not opposed to ἰν τῇ ἁνοχῆ (Bengel, Hodge), but rather to πρό in προγεγονότων, and added emphatically. The time of Christ is a time of critical decision, when the πάρεσις is at an end, and man must either accept the full remission (ἄφεσις) of sin, or expose himself to the judgment of a righteous God.—P. S.]—That He may be just and the justifier, &c. [εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν δίχαιον χαὶ διχαιοῦντα τὸν ἐχπίστεως ̓Ιησοῦ. The εἰς expresses not merely the result, but the design of God in exhibiting Christ to the world as the mercy-seat.—P. S.] We emphasize αὐτόν, one and the same (ein und derselbe).89 That He may be—that is, that He may plainly appear [and be recognized by men in this twofold character as the Just One and the Justifier of the sinner]. The righteousness of God in the death of Christ has fully revealed that which the human view of the early and later times found so difficult to grasp; namely, righteousness and forbearance or love in one spirit, condemnation and deliverance in one act, killing and giving new life in one operation.

[Bengel: “Summum hic habetur paradoxon evangelicum; nam in lege conspicitur Deus justus et condemnans, in evangelio justus, ipse et justificans peccatorem.” This apparent contradiction is solved, objectively, in the love of God, which is the beginning and the end of his ways; and, subjectively, in faith (τὸν ἐχ πίστεως), by which the sinner becomes one with Christ. In the death of Christ, God punished sin and saved the sinner, and Divine justice was vindicated in the fullest display and triumph of redeeming love. Not that the Father poured the vials of His wrath upon His innocent and beloved Son (as the doctrine is sometimes caricatured), but the Son voluntarily, in infinite love, and by the eternal counsel and with the consent of the holy and merciful Father, assumed the whole curse of sin, and, as the representative head of the human family, in its stead and for its benefit, He fully satisfied the demands of Divine justice by His perfect, active and passive obedience. His sacrifice, as the sacrifice of the eternal Son of God in union with human nature, without sin, is of infinite value both as to extent and duration; while the Old Testament sacrifices were merely anticipatory, preparatory, and temporary. Justification is here represented as the immediate effect of Christ’s atoning death. On διχαιόω, comp. the Exeg. Notes on Rom_3:24, and also Doctrinal, below, No. 5. Wordsworth has a long note here on the doctrine of justification. He likewise maintains that διχαιόω (and הִצְדִּיק) in the LXX. and in the New Testament means, not to make righteous, but to account and declare righteous, and to regard and treat as such, in opposition to condemning and pronouncing guilty. But he insists also, that we are actually made righteous by our union with Christ, and that God’s righteousness is not only imputed, but also imparted to us in Him who is “the Lord our Righteousness.” This work of infusion of grace, however, is not properly called justification, but sanctification. Comp. Rom_6:22 : “Being freed from sin, and made servants unto God—i.e., being justified—ye have your fruit unto holiness—this is sanctification.—P. S.]

Second Paragraph; (Rom_3:27-31)

Rom_3:27. Where, then, is the boasting? This announces the great conclusion from the foregoing. The lively expression of the paragraph arises from the triumphant confidence of the Apostle. [Bengel: ποῦ, particula victoriosa.] The χαύχημα [gloriatio] is certainly not the same as χαύχημα [gloriandi materia], subject of boasting (Reiche); but yet it is not exactly bragging (Meyer), since in many persons boasting of the law arose from dogmatic error. Jewish boasting is especially meant here,90 but not exclusively, for the general conclusion is here drawn in reference to the righteousness of the Jews and Gentiles (see Rom_3:19). With the negation of the χαύχησις, the χαύχημα is also denied at the same time.—It is excluded. Perhaps the expression is here chosen with reference to the limits of the court of justice. The law excludes unqualified plaintiffs and defendants.—By what law? (By the law) of works? Since the Mosaic law was a law of works in form only, and not in spirit (see Rom_7:7), the question presupposes that there is no such law of works; the spirit of the law is the law of faith. But the meaning of the question itself is: the law, as such, erroneously made a mere law of works, is too imperfectly developed in its operation to exclude boasting (see Mat_19:20.—By the law of faith. According to Meyer, the Apostle speaks of the law of faith because the gospel prescribes faith as the condition of salvation. According to Tholuck and De Wette, the word νόμος has here the idea of a religious rule (norma).91 But, according to Rom_3:31, the Apostle will completely establish the same law, for the making void of which the Jew charged him. The same revealed law which, in its analytical character—that is, in its single commandments—bears the appearance of a law of single works, is, in its synthetical character, recognized as one, a law of faith (Deu_6:4-5; Mar_12:29; Jam_2:10); because, as our schoolmaster to lead us to Christ, it leads to faith, and in Him first comes to man as the objective principle of faith, and then, as the subjective principle of faith, it becomes the law of the new life. [With νόμος πίστεως, comp. ὑπαχοὴ πίστεως, Rom_1:5; νόμος τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ζωῆς, Rom_8:2; ἔννομος Χριστοῦ, 1Co_9:21; νόμος τέλειος τῆς ἐλευθερίας, Jam_1:25; Jam_2:12—all going to show that the liberty of the gospel has nothing to do with license and antinomianism.—P. S.]

Rom_3:28. Therefore [For] we judge. λογιζόμεθα [censemus, comp. Rom_2:3; Rom_8:18; 2Co_11:5], is not, we infer, nor merely, we think, reckon (Tholuck [Alford, Hodge]), which, with the reading γάρ, would not even make good sense. The expression, “For we think,” would be an odd method of demonstration. It is not the subjective fact of justification which establishes the objective economy of salvation already described; but it is this objective economy which, on the one hand, excludes false justification namely, that which is by works; and, on the other hand, establishes real justification, that which is by faith. We must consider also that the Apostle lays down the statement of Rom_3:28 as the principal proposition to the entire following argument, but will not apply it as proof for the negative statement, that man is not justified by works.—By faith [πίστει = διὰ πίστεως, instrumental cause]. Luther’s addition of alone [durch den Glauben allein] is defended by Tholuck (the Nuremberg edition of the Bible of 1483 also reads, only by faith). Meyer properly remarks: It does not belong to the translation, but it is justified by the context as an explanation.92—Without works of the law. This naturally refers to διχαιοῦσθαι, but not to faith. In the process of justification, the works of the law do not come into coöperation. [Hodge: “To be justified without works, is to be justified without any thing in ourselves to merit justification. The works of the law must be the works of the moral law, because the proposition is general, embracing Gentiles as well as Jews. The Apostle excludes every thing subjective. He places the ground of justification out of ourselves.” Yet faith is something subjective, by which the objective ground of justification is personally appropriated, and made available for our benefit.—P. S.]

Rom_3:29. Or is he the God of the Jews only? [Or, in case that what was said in Rom_3:28 should be called in doubt. Rom_3:29-30 furnish an additional striking proof for Rom_3:28; Meyer.—P. S.] εἶναι τινος, to belong to some one. The Rabbinical, and subsequently the Talmudic Jews, certainly assumed that God was merely the God of the Jews (see Tholuck, p. 162. Meyer refers to Eisenmenger’s Entdecktes Judenthum, i. p. 587).—Paul can declare, without further proof: Yes, of the Gentiles also. The Apostle does not have here in mind chiefly the utterances of the prophets, as Tholuck supposes, but the same fact of Christian experience to which Peter refers, Act_10:46 ff; Act_15:9; and to which he himself refers in Gal_3:5. The Old Testament witnesses were explained and confirmed by the fact of the salvation of the Gentiles by faith, by which fact also his apostleship to the Gentiles was first completely sealed (see 1Co_9:2). [God is not a national, but a universal God, and offers salvation to Gentiles and Jews on precisely the same terms. Hodge: “These sublime truths are so familiar to our minds, that they have, in a measure, lost their power; but as to the Jew, enthralled all his life in his narrow national and religious prejudices, they must have expanded his whole soul with unwonted emotions of wonder, gratitude, and joy.—P. S.]

Rom_3:30. Seeing it is one God. The ἐπείπερ, since [alldieweil, introducing something that cannot be doubted]. According to Meyer, the weight of the proof rests on the unity of God, Monotheism; but the context puts the weight upon the fact that the justification of the Jews and Gentiles as one divine fact—which therefore appears to be divided into two parts—must be traced to one and the same God.—The future διχαιώσει is certainly not used for the present διχαιοῖ (Grotius [more Hebrœorum], and others), still less does it refer to the universal judgment (Beza, Fritzsche); but it assumes the experience that Jews and Gentiles are already justified, in order to give prominence to the future established by it; namely, that Jews and Gentiles will be justified. [The future (= prœsens futurabile) expresses the permanent purpose and continued power of justification in every case that may occur; comp. the future in Rom_3:20; Rom_5:19. Erasmus: “Respexit ad eos qui adhuc essent in Judaismo seu paganismo.—P. S.]—Circumcision by faith. It is remarkable that there is not only a change of the prepositions ἐχ and διά, but also that the article stands with the latter, but not with the former. Meyer regards the change of prepositions, as well as the disappearance of the article from ἐχ, as a matter of indifference.93 Calvin observes in the change of the prepositions ἐχ and διά a certain irony: “Si quis vult habere differentiam gentilis a Judœo, hanc habeat, quod ille per fidem, hic vero ex fide justitiam consequitur” (from Tholuck, p. 162). Meyer properly regards

this explanation as strange. But indifference as to the form of expression would be equally strange. There seems in reality to be a double form of breviloquence here: He will justify the circumcision (which is a circumcision by faith) by faith; for the real Jew has already a germinating faith; and He will justify the uncircumcision (that which through faith has become circumcision) through the faith. Or, more briefly: To the genuine Jew, saving faith, as to its germ, is something already at hand, and justification arises from the completion of the same, just as the fruit from the tree. But to the Gentile, faith is offered as a foreign means of salvation.94

Rom_3:31. Do we then make void the law? The question here arises, whether Rom_3:31 constitutes the conclusion of the preceding train of thought, or whether it opens the new train of thought which begins with Rom_4:1, and extends throughout the chapter. The former acceptation has prevailed since Augustine as the preferable one (Beza, Melanchthon, Tholuck, Philippi [Hodge]); the latter (conformably to Theodoret, Pelagius) has been maintained by Semler, and others, and by De Wette and Meyer. According to Meyer, the Apostle, from Rom_3:31 to Rom_4:25, proves the harmony of the doctrine of justification by faith with the law, by what has been said in the law about Abraham’s justification. Meyer urges against the former view, that then this very important sentence appears merely as an abrupt categorical assertion; and Philippi’s reply, that Rom_8:1 continues it further, certainly does not relieve the matter. But Tholuck justly remarks against the second view, that then a γάρ, instead of οὖν, would be naturally expected in Rom_4:1. [Besides, the main object of Paul here is to show the true method of justification, and not the agreement of the law and the gospel.—P. S.] This much is clear: that Rom_3:31 constitutes the transition to chap. 4. But, in itself, it serves as the conclusion of the paragraph from Rom_3:27-30, in that it brings out the relation of the experimental fact that there are believing Gentiles—to the law. Paul had shown that the justification of the Gentiles, with the justification of the Jews, is to be traced back to one and the same God. By this means, he says, the law is not made void, but established. How far established? The answer is furnished by the preceding verses: As far as the unity of God, which underlies the law, is glorified by the harmony of His saving operations among Jews and Gentiles. Particularism weakens the law, because it makes the law the statute of a national God. The universal Monotheism of Christianity, proved by the universal justification of believers, first properly establishes the law in its true character, by making plain the universal character of the lawgiver.—The sentiment, Do we then make void the law? is sufficiently repelled by the emotional expression, μή γένοιτο, Far be it! by no means! But the opposite sentiment, We establish the law, has been already proved by the fact that the law is defined as the law of faith, and has been traced back to the God of the Jews and Gentiles. This is indeed extended further in what follows, yet not in the form of a continued proof, but in the form of a new scriptural argument. The question, How far does Paul, or Christianity establish the law? has been variously answered; see Tholuck, p. 163. Chrysostom, and others, say, that the salvation in Christ is the end of the law. Most expositors hold that the law is fulfilled by the new obedience, chap. 6. and Rom_8:4 [by love, which is called “the fulfilment of the law;” Rom_13:10. Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Beza, Calov., Philippi.—P. S.]. Tholuck thinks that the testimony of the νόμος and the προφῆται is meant. But this is not a new ἱστάναι; nor would the continuation in chap. 4. be a new ἱστάναι from this point of view; it is only a new proof for the righteousness by faith: the proof from Scripture. The Apostle glorifies and establishes the law on a new and broader foundation, by representing it as a unit, by tracing it to its principle of life, and enlarging its contents from the Jewish particularism to the universality of the revelation of the living God of all men. Thus the Mosaic law, as the type of the Mosaic religion, is glorified so far as it is the representative of all the legal elements of religion in general.95

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

First Paragraph (Rom_3:21-26)

1. As the Old Testament, according to Rom_3:21, has testified of the righteousness of faith contained in the New Testament, so does the New Testament—as the perfect revelation of God’s righteousness—bear witness to the holiness of the law in the Old Testament.

2. It is a defective and inorganic view to believe that, as far as the single attributes of God are concerned, in the New Testament His justice is less prominent than in the Old, in order that His love may appear more prominent. On the contrary, the revelation of His justice is first completed in the New Testament. It is here completed so grandly, that, in proportion to this completion, the Old Testament revelation of justice may be regarded as still veiled. The same may be said of all the Divine attributes. In the New Testament they have a killing and a vivifying—i.e., creative effect. The justice in union with love is grace. In the Old Testament, however, justice appears mainly in its punitive aspect.

3. On the double form and kind of faith, see the Exeg. Notes on Rom_3:22.

4. Also on the δόξα, θεοῦ, see Exeg. Notes on Rom_3:23. As the διχαιοσύνη is the internal part of the Divine δόξα, so is the want of δόξα on man’s part the evidence of his want of διχαιοσύνη. The same connection is likewise exhibited in the life of faith. The δοξάζεσθαι arises from the διχαιοῦσθαι (Rom_8:30).

5. The doctrine of justification. On the διχαιοῦν, see Rom_2:13, and the section relating thereto. On the fact that it is under the διχαιοῦσθαι that man’s utter want of personal righteousness first becomes prominent, see the Exeg. Notes on Rom_3:21. The evangelical definition per fidem is opposed to the Roman Catholic definition propter fidem. The form propter fidem has a double sense. If faith is understood as merit, the order of the work of salvation is reversed, and its causality is transferred to man. It is very clear from the present tense διχαιοῦσθαι (Rom_3:28), that the Apostle distinguishes here, and throughout, between redemption and justification. Christ is, indeed, effectively the righteousness of believers, and virtually the righteousness of humanity, and so far could the redemption be once loosely denominated justification. Yet the Apostle’s usage of language is far above this indefiniteness, and Rom_8:30 proves conclusively (comp. Rom_5:18) that he regards justification as a part of the plan of salvation. The connection between the διχαίωσις—which grace effects in every believer after the χλῆσις—and the ίλασμός, consists in this: that Christ, as the perfect διχαίωμα, is, by the gospel, offered to men, that He is set forth as ίλαστήριον. (Lipsius, in a monograph entitled The Pauline Doctrine of Justification, 1853, holds that the διχαιοσύνη is the condition of righteousness, and that every one is δίχαιος who is just what his destination requires he should be. The author’s conclusion is, that Paul, in no single passage, compels us to divide the divine operation—the result of which is the (preliminary) human διχαιοσύνη—into two distinct and separate acts, the actus efficiens and the actus declaratorius, in such a manner that the latter only may be called διχαιοῦν.)—The way for the Protestant doctrine of justification was prepared by the sound productions of the mysticism of the Middle Ages; for example, in “German Theology.”96 This book contrasts selfdom, or egoism, with entire self-surrender to God and His will, and thereby indicates the deepest ground for the sinner’s justification by faith. Justification, as the appropriation of Christ’s διχαίωμα, makes the gospel, through the power of the Holy Ghost, an individual and special absolution from the guilt of sin, which the believer experiences in peace of conscience and freedom. It makes the objective διχαίωμα in Christ his subjective διχαιοσύνη. Justification is essentially a pronouncing righteous, but by the creative declaration of God; therefore it is also a making righteous, in the sense that it is the communication of a new principle of life, yet in such a way that this new principle of life must ever be regarded as the pure effect of Christ, and not in any way as the cause of justification. The one gracious act of justification is divided into two acts: 1. The offer of the διχαίωμα for faith until faith is awaked by free grace; 2. Accounting faith as righteousness. The effects of justification are, negatively, liberation from the guilt, the curse, and punishment of sin; and, positively, adoption or sonship, by which the believer’s filial relation—that is, the decision of his individual regeneration, and his translation into the state of peace—is pronounced. In the old Protestant theology, justification has been variously confounded too much with the redemption itself; while in our day, as was already the case with Osiander [died 1552], it has often been far too much identified with sanctification.

[Additional remarks on the doctrine of justification by faith, or rather by free grace through faith in Christ.

(a.) Its importance and position in the theological system. It belongs to soteriology, the appropriation of the salvation of Christ to the sinner. It presupposes the fundamental truths of the Trinity, the incarnation, total depravity, the atonement, all of which were revealed before, as the Gospels and Acts precede the Epistles. It is therefore not, strictly speaking, the articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiœ (Luther), but subordinate to the article of Christ, who alone can be called the one foundation and rock of the whole Christian system (1Co_3:11). The doctrine that Christ is the Son of God, and came into the flesh—i.e., was born, died, and rose again, to save sinners—is emphatically “the mystery of godliness” (1Ti_3:16); and forms the burden of the first Christian confession (Mat_16:16-19); its assertion or denial is the criterion of true Christianity and of antichrist (1Jn_4:2-3). But justification by faith is undoubtedly a fundamental article of subjective Christianity and of evangelical Protestantism, as distinct from æcumenical Catholicism, and as opposed to Greek and Roman sectional Catholicism. It constitutes the material or life-principle of Protestantism (principium essendi), as the doctrine of the supreme authority of the Holy Scriptures in matters of faith and practice constitutes its formal principle (principium cognoscendi). It was never properly understood in the Christian Church, not even by Augustine, until Luther, and the other Reformers brought it out into clear light from the Epistles of Paul, especially those to the Romans and Galatians. The unbiassed philological exegesis of modern times has fully justified the scripturalness of this doctrine of the Reformation. Yet the best men in the Church of all ages, and the profoundest divines before the Reformation, such as Augustine, Anselm, Bernard, have, in fact, always come to the same practical conclusion in the end, and, disclaiming all merit of their own, they have taken refuge in the free grace of God, as the only and sufficient cause of salvation. “Our righteousness,” says St. Bernard (Sermo V. de verbis Esaiœ Proph., vi. 1, 2), “our righteousness, if we have any, is of little value; it is sincere, perhaps, but not pure, unless we believe ourselves to be better than our fathers, who no less truly than humbly said: All our righteousnesses are as filthy rags.”

(b.) Definition of justification. It is a judicial act of God by which He freely acquits the penitent sinner, and adopts him as His child on the ground of Christ’s perfect righteousness, and on condition of a living faith. Paul has in his mind a judicial process: The righteous and holy God is the Judge; man is the guilty culprit; the law, or the expressed will of God, is the accuser; Christ, with His perfect sacrifice, steps in as a substitute; the sinner accepts Him in hearty faith, or enters into Christ’s position, as Christ did into his; God, on the ground of this relation, acquits the sinner, and treats him as His own child; the sinner, being one with Christ, no more lives unto himself, but, the grace of God enabling him, unto Christ, who died for him, and rose again. This is justification.

(c.) Relation to the atonement, regeneration, and sanctification. Justification differs:

(aa.) From the atonement (ἱλασμός, ἱλαστήριον, expiation, propitiation, Versühnung) and the consequent reconciliation (χαταλλαγή, at-one-ment in the old sense of the term, as used in the E. V., Rom_5:11, in German Versöhnung), i.e., the reconciliation of God and the sinner by the self-sacrifice of Christ, which fully satisfies the claims of Divine justice, and draws men to God by the attraction of superhuman love. The atonement is the objective ground of justification; it was accomplished once for all time, but justification is repeated in the case of every sinner.

(bb.) From regeneration, or the new birth. This is a creative act of the Holy Spirit in man preceding or accompanying the objective act of justification by God the Father, and resulting in a subjective change of heart, which corresponds to the new relation of the believer as justified in Christ.

(cc.) From sanctification. This is a gradual growth, beginning with regeneration and justification, and culminating in the resurrection of the body. Justification is God’s gracious act toward us; sanctification is God’s gracious work within us: the former is a single act of God, the latter a continuous growth in man.

(d.) The evangelical Protestant (Pauline) doctrine of justification must be maintained:

(aa.) Against Pharisœism, Pelagianism, and Rationalism, or the doctrine of justification by works, which, in various forms and degrees, glorifies human ability and represents justification as a reward for man’s own merit (legalism, self-righteousness, work-righteousness).

(bb.) Against the semi-Pelagian and the Romish or Tridentine, as well as the modern Anglo-Romanizing or Tractarian theory of justification by faith and works, which confounds justification with sanctification (justitia infusa; ex in jus’o justus. redditur), makes it depend on the degree of personal holiness, teaches the meritoriousness of good works (opera meritoria proportionata vitœ œternœ; meritum de congruo and meritum de condigno; opera supererogationis), and divides the glory of our salvation between God and man.

(cc.) Against ultra- and pseudo-Protestant Solifidianism and Antinomianism, which destroy the law, as a rule of conduct, tear justification from its proper antecedents and consequents, and deny the necessity of good works. (Amsdorf, a Lutheran divine of the sixteenth century, went so far as to assert that good works were pernicious or dangerous to salvation; while Major maintained the opposite thesis: bona opera necessaria ad salutem. The result of this controversy was the distinction that good works were necessary, not as a condition of salvation, but as the evidence of saving faith; and that not good works, but only such reliance on them as interfered with trust in the merits of Christ, was dangerous to salvation.)

(dd.) Against subjective Spiritualism and un-churchly Fanaticism, which resolve justification by faith into a justification by feeling, and despise or ignore the Church and the sacraments, as the regular, divinely appointed means of grace.

On the doctrinal aspect of justification by faith, comp. Chemnitz, Concil. Trident., tom. 1, lib. 8; Gerhard, Loci Theologici, tom. 7; John Davenant (Bishop of Salisbury), Disputatio de justitia habituali et actuali, 1631, English translation by Josiah All-port, London, 1844–’46, 2 vols (a standard work of the Anglican Church against the Romish doctrine); my Principle of Protestantism, 1845, p. 54 ff.; Bishop Ch. P. M’Ilvaine, Righteousness by Faith; or the Nature and Means of Justification before God (against the Romanizing doctrine of the Oxford Tracts), Phila., 2d ed., 1864; Dr. James Buchanan, The Doctrine on Justification: an Outline of its History in the Church, and of its Exposition from Scripture, Edinburgh, 1867; the respective sections in the works on Symbolics; several recent dogmatic essays on the subject, by Dorner, 1867, translated by C. A. Briggs for the Am. Presb. Theol. Rev.., New York, April, 1868, pp. 186–214; Riggenbach, in the Studien und Kritiken for April, 1868, pp. 201–243; an article in the British and Foreign Evang. Review for January, 1862, which is fully criticised by Forbes, on Rom. p. 125 ff. The exegetical essays have been mentioned in comments on Rom_1:17, pp. 75, 76.—P. S.]

6. On ἱλαστήριονς, ἱλασμὸ, and ἀπολύτρωσις, see the Exeg. Notes on Rom_3:25. For more detailed information, see my Positive Dogmatics, p. 813 ff. As recent efforts have been made to set aside the true doctrine of atonement itself by refuting the view of Anselm,[97] it should be remembered that the defects in Anselm’s theory were acknowledged even in the Middle Ages, but that they cannot destroy its relative truth and value. The real idea of the atonement cannot be clearly apprehended without understanding the meaning of compassion, of sympathy, of reconciliation in Christ, of the divine judgment-seat in the sinner’s conscience, and of the connection of judgment and deliverance in the sufferings of Christ as well as in the sinner’s conversion.

7. God is the righteous Judge and the justifying God: (1) In the same grace; (2) In the objective work of redemption, or in justification by faith.

8. When the Apostle, in Rom_3:27, contrasts a law of works and a law of faith as excluding each other, and then says in Rom_3:31 : “We establish the law,” it follows that he only recognizes that antithesis in Rom_3:27 as one which the external legalism of the Jews had made; or as the appearance of the antithesis between the economy of the Old and New Testaments, but that his own view was based upon a deeper unity.

9. It is well known that very much has been written about Luther’s sola, Rom_3:28. This word is perfectly true so far as it is contrasted with ἔργα νόμου, for the reading is χωρὶς ἔργων νόμου, without works of the law. Therefore the sola is even positively exclusive. But does it also exclude works of faith? Answer: As soon as a work of faith is added to faith, it is made an ἔργον νόμου, a work of the law. If the work remains a mere phenomenon or manifestation of faith, it has no separate significance in itself.

[Dr. Donne, a standard divine of the Church of England, originally a convert from Romanism (died 1631), in Serm. ii. on Joh_16:8-11, makes the following apt remarks on this sola fide: “Faith is but one of those things which in several senses are said to justify us. It is truly said of God, Deus solus justificat; God only justifies us—efficienter; nothing can effect it, nothing can work towards it, but only the mere goodness of God. And it is truly said of Christ, Christus solus justificat; Christ only justifies us—materialiter; nothing enters into the substance and body of the ransom of our sins but the obedience of Christ. It is also truly said, sola fides justificat; only faith justifies us—instrumentaliter; nothing apprehends, nothing applies the merit of Christ to thee, but thy faith. And lastly, it is as truly said, sola opera justificant ; only our works justify us—declaratoriè; only thy good life can assure thy conscience, and the world, that thou art justified. As the efficient justification, the gracious purpose of God, had done us no good without the material satisfaction, the death of Christ, that followed; and as that material satisfaction, the death of Christ, would do me no good without the instrumental justification, the apprehension by faith; so neither would this profit without the declaratory justification, by which all is pleaded and established. God enters not into our material justification: that is only Christ’s. Christ enters not into our instrumental justification: that is only faith’s. Faith enters not into our declaratory justification (for faith is secret), and declaration belongs to works. Neither of these can be said to justify us alone, so as that we may take the chain in pieces, and think to be justified by any one link thereof—by God without Christ, by Christ without faith, or by faith without works. And yet every one of these justifies us alone, so as that none of the rest enter into that way and that means by which any of these are said to justify us.” Comp. my foot-note on Rom_3:28, p. 136.—P. S.]

10. Rom_3:29. Paul did not need any longer to prove from the Scriptures that God was also the God of the Gentiles. The first phenomenon of the New Covenant: Blessedness of faith, speaking with tongues, and a new life, was, with the Apostles, equivalent everywhere to scriptural proofs, and served for the exposition of the Old Testament. It was, indeed, the specific New Testament evidence which precedes with Paul the argument from the Old Testament in chap. 4.

11. On the means by which Christianity chiefly establishes the law, see the Exeg. Notes on Rom_3:31. The Judaism of the Old Testament first attained its universal historical glory by Christianity, and its thanks are due especially to Paul, who was so hated by the Jews. [Bishop Sanderson (Sermon on 1Pe_2:16, as quoted by Ford): “The law may be considered as a rule; or, as a covenant. Christ has freed all believers from the rigor and curse of the law, considered as a covenant; but He has not freed them from obedience to the law, considered as a rule. The law, as a rule, can no more be abolished or changed, than can the nature of good or evil be abolished or changed.”—P. S.]

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Rom_3:21-26

The revelation of the righteousness of faith through Jesus Christ which is efficacious in God’s sight. It comes to pass: 1. Without the assistance of the law, although testified by the law and the prophets; 2. For all sinners, without distinction, who believe; 3. By the redemption effected by Jesus Christ the Mediator, who proffers the righteousness which is acceptable to God (Rom_3:21-26).—The testimony of the law and the prophets concerning the righteousness which is acceptable to God: 1. Of the law by its typical reference to the atonement; 2. Of the prophets by the Messianic prophecies (Rom_3:21).—The Apostle takes from the law what does not belong to it, and concedes what does belong to it. He denies: 1. Its alleged coöperation in the righteousness which is acceptable to God. But he concedes to it: 2. The testimony of the future atonement (Rom_3:21).—The universality of grace corresponding to the universality of sin (Rom_3:22-24).—What sort of confession should we make to God daily as evangelical Christians? Two kinds: 1. We are altogether sinners, and come short of the glory we should have before God; 2. We are justified freely by His grace, &c. (Rom_3:23-24).—Christ set forth by God to be a propitiation (mercy-seat) through faith in His blood: 1. To what end? To offer His righteousness at this (present) time; 2. Why? Because in time past He could pass over sin by His Divine forbearance, and thereby shake faith in His justice (Rom_3:25-26).—Divine forbearance (Rom_3:25).—God the only just One, and therefore the only Justifier (Rom_3:21).

Luther: “All have sinned,” &c. This is the chief portion and central part of this Epistle, and of the whole Scripture. Therefore understand this text well, for the merit and glory of all works,—as he himself says,—are done away with, and God’s grace and glory alone remain (Rom_3:23).—Sin could be removed neither by laws nor by any good works; that must be done by Christ and His forgiveness (Rom_3:25).—Faith fulfils all laws, but works cannot fulfil a single tittle of the law (Rom_3:31).

Starke: There is only one kind of justification in the Old and New Testaments; namely, that which is by faith in Christ (Rom_3:21).—To have a believing heart, is to hunger and thirst after the grace of God in Christ, and to appropriate the righteousness of Christ for our spiritual satisfaction and refreshment (Rom_3:22).—Do not make a wrong use of this passage against active Christianity, for God’s image must be restored in us in the order of the new birth and daily renewal (Rom_3:23).—Grace and righteousness are the two principal attributes of God which are proved in the work of our salvation. Therefore one cannot be separated from the other, either in the cause or order of our salvation (Rom_3:24).—The faith which appropriates the blood of Jesus Christ and His expiatory death, and presents them to God the Lord, is the only means by which Christ becomes also our mercy-seat (Rom_3:25).—If you are ever so distinguished and wealthy, and are deficient in true and living faith, you can neither be justified nor saved (Rom_3:26).

Osiander: No doctrine must be accepted in the Church of God to which God’s word does not bear witness (Rom_3:21).—Lange: The merit of the blood of Christ is not only the object which faith grasps, but also the foundation on which it firmly rests (Rom_3:25).—Hedinger: Christ our righteousness! Oh, the glorious consolation, which screens us from the wrath of God, the curse of the law, and eternal death! No work, no perfection out of Christ; but faith alone makes us dear children of God—righteous, holy, and blessed (Rom_3:25).

Bengel: Under the law, God appears just and condemning; under the gospel, just, and yet justifying the guilty sinner.

Lisco: The nature of evangelical righteousness is, that it is obtained by faith in Jesus Christ; and it comes to all and upon all who believe in Him. Like a flood of grace it flows to all, and even so overflows as to reach even the heathen. It is therefore a righteousness by faith, and not a righteousness by works.—In the work of redemption, God’s holiness and grace, justice and forbearance, are revealed (Rom_3:25-26).

Heubner: The difficult question is now solved: “How can the sinner find redemption from his sins?” Christianity replies: Believe in Christ (Rom_3:22).—How is the righteousness which God accepts testified by the law and the prophets? 1. By this means: all forgiveness, all redemption, is everywhere described in the Scriptures as the free work of God’s grace; neither the offering, nor man’s own merit, was sufficient for this end; 2. In the emphatic prophecies of a future Redeemer (Rom_3:21).—Unworthiness before God is universal. This is the first prostrating word of revelation: Know that thou art a sinner, a poor sinner; that is, who hast nothing, and must get something from God (Rom_3:23).—Christ’s redemption is: 1. A ransom (Mat_20:28) from the guilt of sin (Eph_1:7); 2. A ransom from the punishment of sin (Rom_5:9); 3. A ransom from the dominion of sin (1Pe_1:18; Rom_3:23).—The subjective condition of redemption is faith as a faith of the heart, which reposes its confidence on Christ’s sacrificial death—a faith that Christ died for me. This for me is the great thing! (Rom_3:26.)—On Rom_3:23-25, Reinhard preached his celebrated Reformation Sermon (2:270) in the year Rom 1800: “The great reason why our Church should never forget that it owes its existence to the renewal of the doctrine of God’s free grace in Christ.”

Besser: The law impels toward righteousness, but it does not confer it.—There are not two orders of salvation, one for Jews and honorable people, and the other for heathen and publicans; but there is only one for all.—We are justified: 1. Without merit; 2. By God’s grace; 3. Through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus (Rom_3:24).—The highest declaration of God’s grace is at the same time the highest declaration of His justice.

J. P. Lange: The fact of salvation is also a miraculous work of God (Rom_3:21).—Redemption as the second and higher world of miracle in relation to the natural world of miracle.—Golgotha is more exalted than Sinai in respect also to God’s justice.—The lightning-flash of New Testament justice: 1. Killing; 2. Making alive.

[Burkitt: Rom_3:24-26. We see here: 1. A glorious privilege for believers, justification; 2. Its efficient cause, God; 3. The moving or impulsive cause, free grace; 4. The meritorious cause, the blood-shedding and death of Christ; 5. The final cause, the declaration of His righteousness; 6. The instrumental cause, faith.—Oh, glorious and all-wise contrivance, whereby God made sufficient provision for the reparation of His honor, for the vindication of His holiness, for the manifestation of His truth and faithfulness, and for the present consolation and eternal salvation of all repenting and believing sinners to the end of the world!—Matthew Henry: Rom_3:25. Christ is the propitiation—there is the healing plaster provided. Faith is the applying of this plaster to the wounded soul.—Faith is the bunch of hyssop, and the blood of Christ is the blood of sprinkling.—Dwight devotes six sermons to the subject of Justification, in which he treats of its nature, source, and means; duty of believing; nature of faith; influence of faith on justification; reconciliation of Paul and James on justification; influence of works on justification; and justification by faith no diminution of motives to obedience (Theology, vol. ii., pp. 515–605).—Clarke: Rom_3:23-24. 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 mercy has embraced all.—The redemption of Christ comprehends whatsoever He taught, did, or suffered, in order to free men from evil.—Hodge: As the cardinal doctrine of the Bible is justification by faith, so the turning-point in the soul’s history, the saving act, is the reception of Jesus Christ as the propitiation for our sins.—All modes of preaching must be erroneous, which do not lead sinners to feel that the great thing to be done, and done first, is to receive the Lord Jesus Christ, and to turn unto God through Him. And all religious experience must be defective, which does not embrace distinctly a sense of the justice of our condemnation, and a conviction of the sufficiency of the work of Christ, and an exclusive reliance upon it as such.—J. F. H.]

On Rom_3:27-31

The exclusion of man’s self-glorification. Its results: 1. Not by the law of works; but, 2. By the law of faith (Rom_3:27).—How are we justified? 1. Not by the works of the law; but, 2. By faith alone (Rom_3:28).—“Only by faith”—Luther’s watchword, and also the watchword of the evangelical church of the present day (Rom_3:28).—The righteousness of the law and the righteousness of faith (Rom_3:28).—God, a God of all people, because He is only one God (Rom_3:29-30).—Faith in the one God considered as the source of the true kind of universalism (Rom_3:29-30).—The popular saying of religious indifferentism: “We all believe in one God,” is only true when we also believe that this God also justifies those who believe (Rom_3:29-30).—The proof that the law is not made void through faith, but established, is supplied by both the deeds and doctrine: 1. Of the Lord; 2. Of His apostles, and especially of Paul (Rom_3:31).

Luther: Faith keeps all the laws, while works keep no point of the law (Jam_2:10).—[A passage in the preface to the Epistle to the Romans is also in place here: Faith is not that human folly and dream which some take for faith. But faith is a divine work in us, which changes us and creates us anew in God, &c.]

Starke: Faith alone justifies and saves; but you must not take away works from faith in order to beautify your sinful life, or it will become unbelief.—There are many forms of arbitrary will on earth, and yet but one way to salvation. God would save all men, and yet by only one way.

Hedinger: Christianity, with its doctrine of faith, opens no door for sin, but shows how we can be obedient to the law with a filial spirit for God’s sake (Rom_3:31).—Quesnel: The more faith in a soul the less pride there is in it.

Gerlach, from Chrysostom: What is the law of faith? Salvation by grace. Herein God’s power is declared, not only in delivering men, but also in justifying them and raising them to glory; for God did not stand in need of works, but sought faith alone.—True, the word alone is not in the text literally, but yet it is there in sense, as it is expressly declared in Gal_2:16-17; without faith, nothing can justify.

Heubner: Christianity unites humanity by one God, by one Father, who is the Saviour of all.—The unity of faith in grace should also establish the unity of hearts.

Spener: Looking at the subject in its true light, faith is not that which itself justifies man—for its strength would be far too small for this work—but faith only accepts the most powerful grace of God as a proffered gift, and thus permits man to be saved by it, instead of its really justifying and saving him. This is the great doctrine of this Epistle, on which every thing rests, and from which every thing must be derived.

Lange: Therefore we judge, &c., and thus it stands (Rom_3:28). True salvation of the inner life a witness: 1. Of the true faith; 2. Of the true gospel; 3. Of the true God.

[Burkitt: Rom_3:31. The moral, not the ceremonial law. The moral law is established by the gospel; Christ has relaxed the law in point of danger, but not in point of duty.—Henry: Rom_3:27. If we were saved by our own works, we might put the crown upon our own heads. But the law of faith, the way of justification by faith, doth forever exclude boasting; for faith is a depending, self-emptying, self-denying grace, and casts every crown before the throne: therefore it is most for God’s glory, that thus we should be justified.—Macknight: Rom_3:28. Faith in God and Christ necessarily leads those who possess it to believe every thing made known to them by God and by Christ, and to do every thing which they have enjoined; so that it terminates in the sincere belief of the doctrines of religion, and in the constant practice of its duties, as far as they are made known to the believer.—Clarke: 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; 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.—Hodge: The doctrine of atonement produces in us its proper effect, when it leads us to see and feel that God is just; that He is infinitely gracious; that we are deprived of all ground of boasting; that the way of salvation, which is open for us, is open for all men; and that the motives to all duty, instead of being weakened, are enforced and multiplied.—In the gospel, all is harmonious: justice and mercy, as it regards God; freedom from the law, and the strongest obligations to obedience, as it regards men.—Barnes: 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.—J. F. H.]

[Homiletical Literature on Justification (in the order of the text).—Cocceius, De Justificatione, op. 7, 180, T. W. Allies, Serm. Romans 1 : B. Hill, Serm, 95; E. Cooper, Lead. Doct., 1. 20; M. Harrison, several sermons on Justification (1691); E. Bather, Serm. 2, 248; T. Boston, Works, 1, 581; S. Knight, Serm. 2, 15; A. Fuller, Three Sermons on Justification, Serm. 176; W. B. Collyer, On Script. Doct., 329; Bishop Hobart, Serm. 2, 32; W. Bridge, Works, 5, 364; C. Simeon, Works, 15, 79; A. Burgess, On Justification (Two Parts); J. Hoole, Serm. 2, 217; W. Stevens, Serm. 1, 268; Bishop Halifax, St. Paul’s Doctrine of Justification by Faith Explained, 2d. ed., Camb. 1762; T. Randolph, Doctrine of Justification by Faith; H. Worthington, Disc. 315; S. Disney, Disc. 125; P. Hutcheson, Serm.; T. Young, Justification, &c.; E. Parsons, Justification by Faith, Halifax, 1821; J. C. Miller, Serm. 359; J. Johnston, Way of Life, 85; T. T. Smith, Serm. 289; W. Shirley, Serm. 151; J. Whitty, Serm. 1:413; J. Wesley, Works (Amer. ed.), vol. 1:47, 385; vol. 2:40, 236; vol. 3:153, 172, 259; vol. 5:37–442; vol. 6:6-23; vol. 7:47.—The Periodical Homiletical Literature on the same subject is very abundant. We give the principal articles: Justification by Faith (R. W. Landis), Amer. Bibl. Repository, 11:453; (D. Curry) Meth. Quart. Rev., 4:5; 5:5; (C. D. Pidgeon) Lit. and Theol. Rev., 6:521; Princeton Rev., 12:268, 561; Justification by Works.—J. F. H.]

Footnotes:

[46]Rom_3:21.—[Or: independently of the law. Luther: ohne Zuthun des Gesetzes. χωρὶς νόμου, opposed to διὰ νόμου, Rom_3:20, is emphatically put first and belongs to the verb. The transposition in the E. V. obscures this connection and destroys the parallelism.—P. S.]

[47]Rom_3:21.—[πεφανέρωται. The perfect has its appropriate force and sets forth this revelation of righteousness as an accomplished and still continued fact. Comp. the αποκαλύπτεται, Rom_1:17. Meyer: “ist offenbar gemacht, zu Tape geleg, so das sie jedem zur Erkenntniss sich darstellt; das Praesens der vollendeten Handlung, Heb_9:26. Bernbardy, p. 378.”—P. S.]

[48]Rom_3:22.—[Even (or, I say, inquam, und zwar) is the best rendering of δέ here, since it is not strictly adversative, but explanatory and reassumptive (if I may coin this term for epanaleptic), as in Rom_9:30; Php_2:8. The contrast is not between the righteousness of God and the righteousness of man (Wordsworth), but between the general idea of the righteousness of God and the specific idea of righteousness through faith now introduced.—P. S.]

[49]Rom_3:22.—[καὶ ἐπὶ πάντας, text. rec., D. F. K. L. א3., Syr., Vulg.; omitted by א1. A. B. C., Griesbach, Lachmann. Alford brackets, and says: “Possibly from homæotel.; on the other hand, the longer text may be the junction of two reading.” Lange retains the received text without remark. It is redundant, but not superfluous. Righteousness is represented as a flood extending unto all (ε ἰ ς πάντας). Ewald: “bestimmt für alle und kommend über alle.”—P. S.]

[50]Rom_3:23.—[The aorist ἥμαρτον, not the perfect ἡμαρτήκασι. Luther: Sie sind allzumal Sünder. Rückert, in his ridiculously presumptuous proclivity to criticise the Apostle’s grammar and logic, calls the use of the aorist here an inaccuracy. Bengel, Olshausen, and Wordsworth refer it to the original fall of the race in Adam. Meyer in loc.: “The sinning of each man is presented as a historical fact of the past, whereby the sinful status is brought about.” So also Tholuck, Philippi, Lange. See Exeg. Notes.—P. S.]

[51]Rom_3:25.—[ἰλαστήριον, expiatorium (a neuter noun from the adjective ἱλαστήριος, propitiatory, expiatory, from the verb ἰλάσκομαι, to appease, to conciliate), may mean Sühnopfer (ἱλ. θῦμα), expiatory sacrifice; or Sühnmittel (= ἱλασμός), expiation, propitiation; or Sühndeckel (ἱλ. ἐπίθεμα, or ἐπίθημα) mercy-seat (cover of the ark). Dr. Lange adopts the last, and translates Sühnungsstift (capporeth; Luther: Gnadenstuhl). The word occurs but twice in the N. T., here and Heb_9:5. In the latter passage it certainly signifies the mercy-seat, or golden cover of the ark of the covenant, called in Hebrew כַּפֹּרֶת (from כִּפֵּר, to propitiate, to atone). This is also the technical meaning of the word in the LXX., Exo_25:18-20; Exo_31:7, &c., and in Philo (Vita Mos. 3:68, p. 668; De Profug. 19, p. 465: τῆς δἐ ἵλεως δυνάμεως, τὸ ὲπίθεμα τῆς κιβωτοῦ, καλεῖ δέ αὐτὸ ἱλαστήριον). A fourth interpretation by Pelagius, Ambrose, Semler, and Wahl takes ἱλαστήριον in the masculine gender = ἱλαστής, propitiator; but this is contrary to the use of the word and inconsistent with the context. There are ἱλαστήρια, but no ἱλαστήριοι. The choice lies between propitiatory sacrifice, and mercy-seat. See Exeg. Notes.—P. S.]

[52]Rom_3:25.—The article τῆς before πίστεως is supported by Codd. B. and A., Chrysostom and Theodoret. [The text, rec. also reads τῆς; but Codd. א. C*. D*. F. G, Orig., Eus., Bas., &c., Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford, omit it. Meyer thinks it may have been omitted in view of διὰ πίστεως, Rom_3:22.—P. S.]

[53]Rom_3:25.—[Or as Alford translates: on account of the overlooking of the sins which had passed, in the forbearance of God. Conybeare and Howson: because in His forbearance God had passed over the former sins of men. Lange: von wegen der Vorbeilassung (Nich heimsuchung) der vorher geschehenen Sünden. The Authorized Version here, following Beza (per remissionem), is a mistranslation. πάρεσις (from παρίημι), which occurs but once in the N. T., differs from ἄφεσις (from ἀφίημι), which occurs seventeen times, in this, that it Isaiah , 1. a temporary prætermission or overlooking, not a total remission or pardon; 2. a work of the Divine ἀνοχή, forbearance (Rom_2:4), not of the Divine χάρις, grace (Eph_1:7); 3. it leaves the question of future punishment or pardon undecided, while the ἄφεσις removes the guilt and remits the punishment. The same idea Paul expresses, Act_17:30 : του̇ς μὲν οὐν χρόνους τῆς ἀγνοίας ὑπεριδὼν (having overlooked) ὁ θεός, &c. διά with the accusative cannot mean through, by means of, or for, but on account of; for Paul clearly distinguishes (even Rom_8:11; Gal_4:13) διά with the accusative and διά with the genitive. The Vulgate correctly renders διά propter, but mistakes πάρεσις for ἄφεσις, remissio. So also Luther: in dem dass er Sünde vergiebt.—P. S.]

[54]Rom_3:26.—τήν [before ἔνδειξιν] in Codd. A. B. C. D. [D*. א. Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Alford. The article was omitted to conform to εἰς ἔνοειξιν, Rom_3:25. But the article distinguishes the ἔνδειξις of Rom_3:26 from the former “as the fuller and ultimate object.” Dr. Lange ingeniously distinguishes between εἰς ἔνδειξιν and πρὸς τὴν ἔνδειξιν. See Exeg. Notes.—P. S.]

[55]Rom_3:26.—The addition Ἰησοῦ is found in Codd. A. B. C. K. [and Sin.], Lachmann [Alford. Omitted by F. G. 52, It., Fritzsche, Meyer, Tischendorf; while other authorities read Χριστοῦ Ἰησ., or τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν I. X. A usual insertion. The force of τὸν ἐκ πίστεως is weakened by the E. V. The ἐκ indicates that πίστις, or Christ rather as apprehended by πίστις, is the root or fountain of his spiritual life; comp. the ἐκ in Rom_1:17; Rom_2:18. Conybeare and Howson: “It means ‘him whose essential characteristic is faith,’ ‘the child of faith;’ comp. Gal_3:7; Gal_3:9. δίκαιον would perhaps be better rendered by righteous, but we have no verb from the same root equivalent to δικαιοῦντα.—P. S.]

[56]Rom_3:28.—The reading ψάρ is supported by Codd. A. and Sin.; but B. C., &c, and especially the context, are in favor of the recepta οὖν. [The external authorities are decidedly in favor of γάρ. Alford regards οὖν as a correction from misunderstanding of λογίζομαι as conveying a conclusion. See Exeg. Notes.—P. S.]

[57]Rom_3:28.—The reading δικαιοῦσθαι άνθ ρ. πίστει. [The recep a reads πίστ ει before δικαιοῦσθαι, to throw emphasis on faith. But א1. B. C. D. read δι κ. πίστει ἄνθρωπον.—P. S.]

[58]Rom_3:28.—[χωρὶς ἔργων νόμου, without or apart from law (legal) works Genetzeswerke) or works of the law.—P. S.]

[59]Rom_3:29.—Lachmann, with Codd. A. C. F. [Sin.], and many others, declare for μόνον. Tischendorf, with B. and ancient fathers, favor μόνων. [This is too poorly supported and can easily be accounted for by the preceding Ἰουδαίων.—P. S.]

[60]Rom_3:30.—ἐπείπερ [recepta], instead of εἴπερ, which probably arose because the former occurs only here in the N. T. (see Meyer). [But εἴπερ is better supported by A. B. C. D2. Sin1., &c, and preferred by Alford.—P. S.]

[61]

Rom_3:31.—[ἱστῶμεν (indicative from ἱστάω, a less usual form for ἵσταμεν, from ἵστημι) is the reading of א3. D3. E. I. K. and Elz., and is defended by Fritzsche, for the reason that it closes the sentence with more gravity and power, and corresponds more harmoniously to the preceding καταργοῦμεν. But ἱστάνομεν (a late form of the same verb) is better supported by א1. A. B. C. D2. F. Orig, &c., and is recommended by Griesbach and adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Alford. The sense is the same: to make stand fast, to establish, to confirm, = βεβαιοῦν, stabilire.—P. S.]

[Forbes arranges the important section, Rom_3:21-26, in this way, which may assist somewhat in the exegesis:

21. Νυνὶ δὲ χωρὶς νόμου

Δικαιοσύςη Θεοῦ πεφανέρωται,

Μαρτυρουμένη ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῶν προφητῶν,

22.      Δικαιοσύνη δὲ Θεοῦ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,

Εἰς πάντας καὶ ἐπὶ πάντας τοὺς πιστεύοντας.

23.                Οὐ γάρ ἐστιν διαστολή.

Πάντες γὰρ ἥμαρτον, καὶ ὑστεροῦνται τῆς δόξης τοῦ Θεοῦ.

24. a Δικαιούμενοι δωρεὰν τῇ αὐτοῦ χάριτι

25.          b     Διὰ τῆς ἀπολυτρώσεως τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ̓Ιησοῦ,

Ὃν προέθετο ὁ Θεὸς ἱλαστήριον

a Διὰ πίστεως ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ αἵματι,

b Εἰς ἔνδειξιν τῆς δικαιοσύνης αὐτοῦ,

Διὰ τὴν πάρεσιν τῶν προγεγονότων ἁμαρτημάτων

Ἐν τῇ ἀνοχῇ Θεοῦ,

26. b     Πρὸς τὴν ἔνδειξιν τῆς δικαιοσύνης αὐτοῦ

Ἐν τῷ νῦν καιρῷ,

β     Εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν δίκαιον

α Καὶ δικαιοῦντα τὸν ἐκ πίστεως ̓ Ιησοῦ.—P. S.]

[62][So also Hodge: “This righteousness which, so to speak, had long been buried under the types and indistinct utterances of the old dispensation, has now in the gospel been made clear and apparent.—P. S.]

[63][διὰ πίστεως, by means of; through; not διὰ πίστιν, on account of. Faith is the appropriating organ and subjective condition, not the ground and cause of our justification.—P. S.]

[64][Berlage, Scholten, V. Hengel, take Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ as gen. of the author: fides quæ auctore Jesu Christo Deo habetur. See against this Meyer in loc., footnote.—P. S.]

[65][Meyer: “ἥμαρτον. Das Sündigen eines Jeden ist als historisches Factum der Vergangenheit, wodurch der sündige Zustand bewirkt ist, dargestellt. Das Perfect, würde es als vollendet dastehende Thatsache bezeichnen.” See Text. Note5, and Exeg. Notes on πάντες ἥμαρον in Rom_3:12.—P. S.]

[66][This would be expressed rather by καύχησις, or καύχημα; Rom_3:27; Rom_4:2; 1Co_5:6, &c.—P. S.]

[67][Tholuck (p. 144) explains: Die von Gott ausgehende Ehrenretlung, dem Sinne nach die Gerechterkt lärung, and quotes from Schlichting: “hoc loco significant eam gloriam, quum Deus hominem pronunciat justum.—P. S.]

[68][Only the honor which proceeds from God can stand before God. So far the explanations, No. 4 coram Deo, and No. 5 a Deo, amount to the same thing, as Meyer remarks.—P. S.]

[69][Still another exposition is that of Hofmann of Erlangen (Schrifibeweis, vol. i. p. 632, 2d ed.): the δόξα which belongs to God, as His own attribute, like the δόξα. Ewald: the δόξα which man had through creation, Psa_8:8, but which he lost through sin.—P. S.]

[70][Wordsworth lays stress on the present tense, as indicating that the work of justification is ever going on by the application of the cleansing efficacy of Christ’s blood to all who lay hold on Him by faith.—P. S.]

[71][Literally, release or deliverance of prisoners of war or others from (ἀπό) a state of misery or danger by the payment of a ransom. (λύτρον, or ἀντίλυτρον) as an equivalent; the ransom in our case is the life or blood of Christ, Mat_20:28; Eph_1:7; 1Ti_2:6; Tit_2:14; 1Pe_1:18; 1Pe_2:24. The synonymous verbs, ἀγοράζειν, 1Co_6:20; 1Co_7:23; ἐξαγοράζειν, Gal_3:13; περιποιεῖσθαι, Act_20:28; λυτροῦσθαι, Tit_2:14, all imply the payment of a price.—P. S.]

[72][Olshausen calls this verse the “Acropolis of the Christian faith.” Among English commentators Wordsworth and Hodge are very full on this verse, especially the former, whoso commentary is very unequal, passing by many important passages without a word of explanation, and dwelling upon others with disproportionate length. Hodge is much more symmetrical, but equally dogmatical. Of German commentators, comp. Olshausen, Tholuck, Philippi, Meyer.—P. S.]

[73][Where προτίθημι is used of God’s eternal purpose. In the third passage where Paul employs this verb, Rom_1:13, he means his own purpose. The E. V. translates correctly, (hath) set forth, but suggests in the margin, foreordained. This interpretation would not necessarily require, as Meyer asserts, the infinitive εἶναι (quem esse voluit Deus), comp. προορίζειν, ἐκλέγεσθαι τινά τι, and Rom_8:29 : Jam_2:5. But it is inconsistent with the context; for Paul refers to a fact rather than a purpose, and emphasizes the publicity of the fact; comp. πεφανέρωται, Rom_3:21, and εἰς ἔνδειξιν, Rom_3:25.—P. S.]

[74][Kypke quotes Euripides, Iphig. Aul., 1592; but in this passage προὔθηκε means either simply: Diana set forth (the sacrificial animal), or she preferred. See Meyer.—P. S.]

[75][Meyer adds examples from Euripides, Thucydides, Demosthenes, and also from the LXX., and remarks, in a note, that the Greeks use προτίθεσθαι especially of the exposure of corpses to public view, and that the Apostle may nave had this in mind.—P. S.]

[76][Προτίθεσθαί τι means to set forth something as his own to others. Comp. J. Chr. K. v. Hofmann: Der Schrifibeweis, ii. 1, p. 337 (2d ed.): “Nicht blos ein Interesse hat Gott dabei (Meyer, Schmid), sondern sein ist und von ihm kommt er, den er hinstellt, und er machtihn zu dom, als was er ihn hinstellt.—P. S.]

[77][This meaning of ἱλαστήριον does not occur in the LXX., but often in the later Greek writers. See the examples quoted by Meyer in loco, who himself adopts this explanation. Comp. also the analogous terms χαριστήριον and εὐχαριστήριον, thank-offering, καθάρσιον, offering for purification, σωτήριον, sacrificium pro salute (Heilopfer). The sense then is this: God set forth Jesus Christ, in the sight of the intelligent universe, as a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of the world. The choice lies between this and the third view; the second having no support in the use of language, besides being too abstract. Dr. Lange has made the third interpretation (mercy-seat) more plausible than any other commentator. See below. Comp. also Philippi, p. 105 f., and Forbes, p. 166, for the same view.—P. S.]

[78][So also Hofmann, l. c., i. 1, p. 340. He takes ἱλαστήριον to be essentially the same as ἱλασμός in 1Jn_4:10 : ἀπέστειλεν τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἰλασμόν. The E. V. translates both words propitiation. Dr. Morrison, in a monograph on Romans 3, as I learn from Forbes (p. 166), maintains that ἱλαστήριον is never used substantively in the meaning of propitiatory sacrifice, and concludes for the adjective meaning of “set forth as propitiatory,” which as applied to Christ, would designate Him as the antitypical fulfilment of all the symbols of propitiation.—P. S.]

[79][Philippi, p. 108, remarks: “The Scripture says, that Christ offered Himself to God as a propitiatory sin-offering, Heb_9:14; Heb_9:28; Eph_5:2; Joh_17:19, but not, that God offered and exhibited Him to mankind as a sacrifice. The sacrifice is not offered by God, but to God.” But there is a difference between God offering His Son, and God setting forth His Son as a sacrifice to the contemplation of the world.—P. S.]

[80][The LXX. uses ἱλαστήριον in no other sense, except in the isolated passage, Eze_43:14; Eze_43:17; Eze_43:20, so that every Jewish Christian reader of the Romans must at once have been reminded of the Capporeth in the Holy of holies. Dr. Hodge, p. 143, asserts that this use of ἱλαστήριον in the LXX., arose from a mistake of the Hebrew term, which, means a cover, and never the mercy-seat. (So also Gesenius, Fritzsche, De Wette, and Bleek, Comm. on Heb_9:5, vol. iii., p. 499, note b.) But כַּפֹּרֶת is not derived from the unusual Kal of the verb קפר (to cover, Gen_6:14), but from the Piel כִּפֵּר, which always means, to forgive, to propitiate, to atone (Lev_16:33; Deu_32:43; Eze_43:20; Eze_43:26, &c.), and is the technical term, in the Mosaic ritual, for the object and intent of sacrifice. If the word were formed from the Kal, it would be כְּפֹרֶת. “The golden lid was called כַּפֹּרֶת, not because it covered the open ark, but because it subserved the act of expiation which was here performed “(Bähr, Symbolik des Mos. Cultus, i., p. 381). The Capporeth was the centre of the presence and revelation of God, and His glory dwelt over it between the two cherubim which overshadowed the ark, and represented the creation. Hence the Holy of holies was called בֵּית הַכַּפֹּרֶת (1Ch_28:11). The Peshito and Vulgate (propiliatorium) have followed the LXX. Comp. also Tholuck, Romans , 5 th ed., p. 157, note; and Ewald, Alterth., p. 165. But Ewald and Meyer derive כַּפֹּרֶת from כּפר in the sense of scabere, to rub off, to forgive; against which Tholuck protests in favor of the usual derivation from כִּפֵּר. Ewald (l. c., p. 165, 3d ed. of 1866) maintains that Capporeth cannot mean the plain cover, as if the ark had no other, but a second cover or a separate settle (the footstool of Jehovah), which was even more important than the ark itself, and is so described, Eze_25:17-17; Ezek. 26:34, &c. He derives it from כפר, as scamnum, or scabellum from scabere, and refers to כֶּכֶשׁ, 2Ch_9:18, and to an Ethiopic verb.—P. S.]

[81][Wordsworth, on the contrary, urges προέθετο as an argument against this interpretation, since the mercy-seat was not set forth, but concealed from the people and even from the priests. But this has no force.—P. S.]

[82][Repeated by Jowett in loc.—P. S.]

[83][Meyer, in the third and fourth editions, connects διὰ τῆς πίστεως with ἱλαστήριον, and ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ αἴματι only with προέθετο: God set forth Christ in His blood (i.e., by causing Him to shed His blood, in which lies the power of the atonement) as a sin-offering, which is effective through faith. De Wette connects both διὰ πίστ. and ἐν τῷ αὐτ. αἵμ. alike with ὃν προέθετο ἱλαστήριον, the former expressing the means of the subjective appropriation (das subjective Aneignungsmittel), the latter the means of the objective exhibition (das objective Darstellungsmittel) of Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice. So also Alford, who seems to follow De Wette (at least in the Romans) more than any other commentator.—P. S.]

[84][Meyer, p. 146 (4th ed.): “In the strict sense, the judicial (more particularly the punitive) righteousness, which demanded a holy satisfaction, and secured it in the atoning sacrifice of Christ.” De Wette (and, after him, Alford): “This idea alone suits the δικαιοῦν, which is likewise judicial. A sin-offering excites, on the one hand, the feeling of guilt, and is expiation; on the other, it produces pardon and peace; and thus Christ’s death is not only a proof of God’s grace, but also of His judicial righteousness, which requires punishment and expiation (2Co_5:21). Here is a foundation for the Anselmic theory of satisfaction, but not for its grossly anthropopathic execution.—P. S.]

[85][Forbes, p. Rom 168: “God’s judicial righteousness in both its aspects, of sin-condemning and sin-forgiving righteousness.—P. S.]

[86][Dr. Hodge, from fear of Romanizing inferences, takes πάρεσις in the sense of ἄφεσις, and adopts the false translation of the Vulgate propter remissionem, “because God had overlooked or pardoned sin from the beginning.” ? “To say God did not punish sins under the Old Dispensation, is only a different way of saying that He pardoned them. So, ‘not to impute iniquity,’ is the negative statement of justification.” Comp. against this, Textual Note8. Hodge goes on to say (p. 150): “This passage is one of the few which the Romanists quote in support of their doctrine that there was no real pardon, justification, or salvation before the advent of Christ. The ancient believers, at death, according to their doctrine, did not pass into heaven, but into the limbus patrum, where they continued in a semi-conscious state until Christ’s descensus ad inferos for their deliverance. The modern transcendental theologians of Germany, who approach Romanism in so many other points [?], agree with the Papists also here. Thus Olshausen says, ‘Under the Old Testament there was no real, but only a symbolical forgiveness of sins.’ Our Lord, however, speaks of Abraham as in heaven; and the Psalms are filled with petitions and thanksgiving for God’s pardoning mercy.” But how will Dr. Hodge on his theory explain the Old Testament doctrine of Sheol or Hades before Christ’s resurrection, and such passages as Heb_9:15; Heb_11:39-40; Act_13:39, which likewise plainly teach the incompleteness of the Old Testament salvation before the advent of Christ? There certainly can be no remission of sin without the sacrifice of Christ; and whatever remission there was under the Old Dispensation, was granted and enjoyed only by reason of the retrospective efficacy, and in trustful anticipation of that sacrifice. But anticipation falls far short of the actual reality. Tholuck calls the atonement of Christ not unaptly “the Divine theodicy for the past history of the world.—P. S.]

[87][Hence Dr. Lange, in his translation, makes a period after ἁμαρτημάτων. I prefer the construction of Meyer and Philippi as being more natural. The ἀνοχή must not be confounded with πρός: the former suspends and puts off the judgment by πάρεσις, the latter abolishes the guilt of sin by ἄφεσις.—P. S.]

[88][Meyer: “πρὸς τὴ νἔνδειξιν, Wiederaufnahme des εὶς ἔνδειξιν, Rom_3:25, und zwar ohne δέ, Rom_3:22, icobei εἰ ς mit dem gleichbedeutenden πρός absichtslos vertauchst ist, der Artikel aber der Vorstellung der bestimmten, geschichtlich gegebenen ἔνδειξις dient, was dem Fortschritte der Darstellung entspricht.” So also Tholuck and Philippi. The latter commentator explains the exchange of πρός for εἰς from euphony, to avoid the threefold repetition of εἰς (ἔςδ., Rom_3:25; εἰς τὸ εἶναι, Rom_3:26).—P. S.]

[89][Meyer takes αὐτός simply as the pronoun of the third person. It evidently belongs both to δίκαιον and δικαιοῦντα.—P. S.]

[90][Hence the article ἡ, which seems to refer to the καύχησις already spoken of in Rom_2:17; Rom_3:19, comp. below, Rom_3:29. So Chrysostom, Theodoret (τὸ ὑψηλὸν τῶν ̓Ιουδαίων φρόνημα), Bengel, Rückert, Tholuck, Philippi, Meyer, Alford; while Fritzsche, Hodge, and others, take it in a general sense of the boasting of the sinner before God; which, of course, includes the boasting of the Jews over the Gentiles.—P. S.]

[91][So also Alford and Hodge: “νόμος is not used here in its ordinary sense. The general idea, however, of a rule of action is retained.”—P. S.]

[92][This is very true. Luther’s allein is correct in substance, and appropriate as a gloss or in a paraphrase, but has no business in the text. It is a logical inference from the context, and is equivalent to the ἐὰν μή in the parallel passage, Gal_2:16. The Latin Vulgate had taken the same liberty, it is true, in other cases; and, in this very verse, Luther’s insertion can be justified by Catholic versions, viz., the oldest German Catholic Bible of Nuremberg (published 1483, the year of Luther’s birth), which reads: Nur durch den Gl., and two Italian versions (of Genoa, 1476, and Venice, 1538, per la sola fede). Even Erasmus defended Luther in this case, and said: “Vox sola tot clamoribus lapidata hoc sæculo in Luthero, reverenter in Patribus [?] auditur.” Comp. Wolf, Koppe, Tholuck, and Philippi in loco. Nevertheless, the insertion of the “sola” in the translation was unnecessary and unwise, and, in the eyes of Romanists, it gave some plausibility to the unjust charge of falsifying the Scriptures. It brought Paul into direct verbal (though no real) conflict with James, when he says that by “works man is justified, and not by faith only” (οὐκ ἐκ πίστεως μόνον, Rom_2:24). The dogmatic formula, sola fide (hence the term solifidianism), has become a watchword of evangelical Protestantism, and, rightly understood—i.e., in the sense of gratia sola—it expresses a most precious truth, which can never be sacrificed. But it must not be confounded with fide solitaria, a faith that is and remains alone. The χωρὶς ἔργων νόμου must be connected with the verb, not with πίστει. The Bible never says: “faith justifies,” but, “we are justified by faith (πίστει),” because faith comes into view here simply as a means, or as the ὄργανον ληπτικόν which apprehends and appropriates Christ; and hence it is by faith, without the coöperation of works, that we are justified. But faith is nevertheless the fruitful source of all good works. “Fides sola justificat, at nec est, nec manet sola: intrinsecus operatur et extrinsecus.” The more full and correct formula would be: Gratia sola justificamur per fidem quæ christi justitiam apprehendit et per caritatem operatur (πίστις δι ̓ ἀγάπης ἐνεργουμένη), or salvation by grace alone as apprehended by a living faith. Justifying faith purifies the heart, overcomes the world, and abounds in fruits of righteousness. It is impossible truly to believe in Christ, without partaking of the power of His holy life. Wordsworth in loc. hits the point, when he says: “Though it is by faith we are justified, and by faith only, yet not by such a faith as has no works springing out of it. Every such faith is a dead faith. And yet it is not from the works that spring out of faith, but from the faith which is the root of works, that all are justified.” In other words, it is not by faith as an active or working, but by faith as a receptive or appropriating principle, by which we are justified; yet that which faith receives is a power of life which must at once manifest itself in good works. It is but just to Luther to add, that he taught most clearly and forcibly this inseparable connection between faith and works. I shall quote but one passage from his admirable preface to the Epistle to the Romans: “O es ist ein lebendig, geschäftig, thätig, mächtig Ding um den Glauben, dass es unmöglich ist, dass er nicht ohne Unterlass sollte Gutes wirken. Er fragt auch nicht, ob gute Werke zu thun sind, sondern ehe man fragt, hat er sie gethan, und ist immer im Thun. ? Also dass unmöglich ist, Werk vom Glauben zu scheiden; ja, so unmöglich, als brennen und leuchten vom Feuer mag geschieden werden.” Comp. p. 140, No. 9.—P. S.]

[93][So also Hodge, since Paul uses both forms indiscriminately; ἐκ, in Rom_1:17; Rom_3:20; Rom_4:16; and διά, in Rom_3:22; Rom_3:25; Gal_2:16, and sometimes first the one and then the other, in the same connection. Comp. the English prepositions by and through. According to De Wette and Alford, ἐκ πίστεως, by faith, expresses the objective ground; διὰ τῆς πίστεως, through his (their) faith, the subjective medium of justification. Jowett connects ἐκ πίστεως with περιτομήν, the circumcision which is by faith, and thereby destroys the correspondence to the other member. Green (Gr., p. 300, as quoted by Alford) refers διὰ τῆς πίστεως to πίστεως just mentioned, by the instrumentality of the identical faith which operates in the case of the circumcised. Bengel: “Judæi pridem in fide fuerant; gentiles fidem ab illis recens nacti erant.”—P. S.]

[94][Very similar is the interpretation of Wordsworth: The Jews, or children of Abraham, are justified out of or from (ἐκ) the faith which Abraham their father had, and which they are supposed to have in him, being already in the covenant with God in Christ. The Gentiles, οἱ ἔξω, must enter that door of the faith of Abraham, and pass through it (διά), in order to be justified. There is but one Church from the beginning. Abraham and his seed are in the household of faith in Christ, but they must live and act from its spirit; the heathen must enter the house through the door of that faith in Him.—P. S.]

[95][Comp. a long note of Wordsworth in loc., who assigns no less than twelve reasons for the assertion of Rom_3:21, viz., because the doctrine of justification is grounded on the testimony of the law that all are under sin; because the sacrifice of Christ was pre-announced by the passover, and other sacrifices of the law; because the law reveals God as a just Judge, who needs an adequate propitiation for sin; because the death of Christ is such a propitiation; because Christ has, by His perfect obedience to the law, established its dignity; because justification by faith obliges men to new degrees of love and gratitude to God, &c., &c. But these are all subordinate points.—In one sense the law is abolished, as a type and shadow of things to come; as a hilling letter, with its curse; comp. Eph. 2:25; Gal_3:13; but as to its moral contents, as the expression of the holy will of God, as a rule of conduct, it was perfectly fulfilled by Christ, and is constantly fulfilled by every believer in love to God and love to our neighbor. The decalogue is a national code in form, a universal code in spirit and aim. This applies to all the Ten Commandments, from which we cannot take out one (say the second, or the fourth) without marring the beauty, harmony, and completeness of the whole. Christ has settled that question in His interpretation of the law, by the fundamental principle of the magna charta of the kingdom of heaven, as laid down Mat_5:17 ff.—P. S.]

[96][The Deutsche Theologie, or Theologia Germanica, is the work of an unknown author of the fifteenth century, and was edited by Dr. Luther with a highly commendatory preface in 1516, one year before the commencement of the Reformation. Recent editions by Pfeiffer, 1855, and Reifenrath, 1863. There is also an English translation by Susanna Winkworth, with introductions by Bunsen and Kingsley, London, 1855, reprinted at Andover, 1856.—P. S.]

[97] [As set forth in his celebrated tract, Cur Deus Homo. An able and vigorous, but unsuccessful attempt to set aside the orthodox view of the atonement has been made in America by Dr. Bushnell, The Vicarious Sacrifice, New York, 1866. Comp. also the English work of Young on Christ the Light and Life of the World, 1867, and Jowett’s excursus on the Doctrine of the Atonement (Rom., p. 468 ff.—P. S.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3. The Righteousness of God Revealed.

Justification, what it is and what it Includes. Chapter 3:21-5:11.

CHAPTER 3:21-31

1. The Righteousness of God Manifested. (Rom 3:21-22.)

2. Just and Justifier. (Rom 3:23-26.)

3. Not of Works but of Faith. (Rom 3:27-31.)

Rom 3:21-22

And now God comes forward and manifests His righteousness. Rom 3:21 must be connected with Rom 1:17. As previously stated chapter 1:18-3.20 is a parenthesis proving all the world destitute of righteousness and therefore guilty. Righteousness of God as revealed in the Gospel was the statement in chapter 1:17 and it is this which is brought more fully in view. The term “Righteousness of God” is much misunderstood. Not a few think it is the righteousness of Christ (a term nowhere used in Scripture) which is attributed to the believing sinner. They teach that Christ fulfilled the law, lived a perfect life on earth and that this righteousness is given to the sinner. All this is unscriptural. Righteousness cannot be bestowed by the law in any sense of the word. If the holy life of the Son of God, lived on earth in perfect righteousness could have saved man and given him righteousness, there was no need for Him to die. “If righteousness came by the law then Christ is dead in vain” (Gal 2:21). It is God’s righteousness which is now on the side of the believing sinner; the same righteousness which condemns the sinner, covers all who believe. And this righteousness is revealed in the Gospel. God’s righteousness has been fully met and maintained in the atoning work of Christ on the Cross. By that wonderful work God is now enabled to save sinners and to save them righteously. The righteousness of God is therefore first of all revealed in the Gospel of Christ. Apart then from the law, righteousness of God is manifested, the righteousness of God by faith of Jesus Christ. And this righteousness now revealed was also witnessed to by the law and the prophets. The law of the different sacrifices, insufficient in themselves to take away sins, pointed to the great sacrifice, in which God would be fully glorified as well as His righteousness satisfied. There were many types and shadows. Now since the righteousness of God is fully made known in the Gospel we can trace God’s wonderful thoughts and purposes in the types and histories of the Old Testament. To deny that the law testified to the coming redemption by the blood of Jesus Christ is to deny the Gospel itself. And this is done in the camp of higher criticism. But the Prophets also witnessed to it (Isa 41:10; Isa 46:13; Isa 51:5-6; Isa 51:8; Isa 56:8).

It is blessed to see that the Prophet Isaiah who has the most to say concerning the sufferings of Christ, also witnesses to the righteousness which should follow. “Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool” (Isa 1:18). “Thou hast made me to serve with thy sins, thou hast wearied me with thine iniquities. I, I am He that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake and will not remember thy sins” (Isa 43:24-25). “A just God and a Saviour” (Isa 45:21). “His Name... the Lord our righteousness” (Jer 23:6). The old, old question never fully answered “how should man be just with God?” is now solved. Thus the Oracles of God witness to the righteousness of God. And this righteousness of God by faith of Jesus Christ is “unto all and upon all them that believe.” It is unto all, which means that the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ is sufficient to save all. The whole world may be saved. It is “upon all that believe,” which means that only those who believe on Christ are covered by the righteousness of God and are justified.

Rom 3:23-26

“Being justified freely by His Grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” Christ has met all, He paid for all our sins. If we believe on Jesus we are justified freely by His Grace, that is, as a free gift. And justification is acquittal; we are acquitted from sin and from any charge of it. “It is divine righteousness that acts in justifying; righteousness is just that attribute of God which is concerned in it. It is like a broad, effectual shield stretched over the believer, and for all like a house that with its open door invites men to take shelter from the coming storm of judgment.” The redemptive work of the Lord Jesus Christ has satisfied every claim forever. Christ has paid the price and all who believe are fully acquitted from every charge and penalty. “Whom God hath set forth a mercy seat through faith by His blood.” On the day of atonement on the mercy seat, overshadowed by the Cherubim, the blood was sprinkled. And now the better blood, that which alone can take away sin, is upon the mercy seat, and God is faithful and just on account of that blood, to justify the believer.

“To declare His righteousness in respect of the passing by the sins that had taken place before, through the forbearance of God.” The sins that had taken place before, does not mean the sins committed before the conversion of an individual believer. It means the sins of believers before Christ had come and died. When sins were forgiven in Old Testament times God’s gracious forbearance was manifested, but when Christ had paid the great redemption price, when His blood had been shed, then God’s righteousness was made manifest in having declared righteous believers, who lived before Christ had died. In view of what God’s blessed Son would do, a righteous God forgave the sins of all who believed. And now God is just; His righteousness is unchanged and fully maintained and as the just God He is the justifier of Him that believes on Jesus. The justification of the believer is fully consistent with the righteousness of God. Negatively stated “what if God were not to justify, declare free, a sinner who believes in Jesus?” Then God would not be just to the blood of Christ. And in view of these wonderful revelations of the Gospel of Christ, so far above man’s wisdom, God-like from start to finish, how awful the rejection of this blessed Gospel, as well as the perversion of it! Surely a righteous God must deal with such in judgment of eternal wrath.

Rom 3:27-31

Boasting from man’s side is excluded. The law could do nothing but condemn man. The principle of simple faith excludes all boasting. “Not of works lest any man should boast.” It is all of God and therefore all the praise belongs to Him. And there is another question. God justifies the circumcision (the Jews); He justifies the uncircumcision by faith (Gentiles). “Do not we then make void the law by faith? Far be the thought! No, but we establish the law.” The law is not made void but established by the Gospel, not in the sense that it is to help the sinner. The broken law and its curse was borne by Christ; therefore the law has been vindicated as well as the holiness and righteousness of God. The man who tries to be right with God by the works of the law makes the law void, for he will not live up to the letter of the law, as the law demands and excuses his failures at the expense of the law, which is holy and good.

Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Justification by Faith.

The righteousness of God revealed:

v. 21. But now the righteousness of God without the Law is manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the prophets;

v. 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,

v. 23. for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God;

v. 24. being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus;

v. 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;

v. 26. to declare, I say, at this time His righteousness: that he might be just, and the Justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

"Having proved that justification, on the ground of legal obedience or personal merits, is for all men impossible, Paul proceeds to unfold the method of salvation presented in the Gospel. " (Hodge.) In v. 20 the sentence of condemnation concerning them all has been declared. And only he that has this knowledge of sin will incidentally comprehend, understand, what is really meant with the righteousness which is valid before God. The apostle places his statements as an expression of logical consequence: "But now. " Although, then, all men are under the sentence of condemnation, there is still hope for them, there is a way of justification, of salvation, open for all of them. Without the Law the righteousness of God is revealed, manifested. The Law has nothing to do with this revelation; the righteousness which is here spoken of is not that of the Law. It is God’s method of justification which is here presented, as in chap. 1:17. It is the righteousness of which God is the Source and Author, which comes from Him alone, which He alone can give, and which therefore is acceptable in His sight. It is the righteousness which is imputed to us by God for the sake of Jesus Christ, of which Luther confesses: "Therefore this is a majestic preaching and heavenly wisdom that we believe: our righteousness, salvation, and consolation are outside of us, that we should be righteous, acceptable, holy, and wise before God, and still there is in us only sin, unrighteousness, and foolishness. In my conscience there is nothing but the feeling and the memory of sin and of the terrors of death, and yet I should look elsewhere and believe that sin and death is not there. " Justification does not designate a moral change in man, but signifies a forensic act on the part of God, by which He imputes to us, makes us possessors of, a righteousness which was not ours, which we did not merit: But whom God justifies, declares to be righteous, he is righteous, although all the world and all devils unite in condemning him, though even his own conscience blames and condemns him. This righteousness has been manifested, it has been made plain, placed in the light. The sentence of God according to which the sinner is declared righteous was spoken and existed in Christ before the foundation of the world. And this is now made known to sinners through the Gospel, by the witness of the Law and the prophets, the two principal parts of the Old Testament Scriptures, in both of which parts the Gospel-message was plainly contained; for the prophecies of Christ proclaimed the salvation in and through Christ.

This thought is again taken up in the next verse for further explanation: The righteousness; namely, before God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and upon all that believe. That is the righteousness to which the apostle refers, the righteousness which is valid before, acceptable to. God, and which becomes the possession of all those that believe in Jesus Christ, the God-man, the Messiah, and thus accept the salvation which has made justification possible. The Gospel-message works faith in the hearts of men, and this faith does not earn or merit righteousness before God, but accepts, receives, and appropriates the imputed righteousness. Faith is the trustful acceptance of the mercy of salvation. By believing the Gospel, the believer accepts and appropriates his Savior, Jesus Christ, and therefore also the righteousness which Jesus has prepared. The righteousness of God is intended for all those that believe, and therefore it also is poured forth like a stream upon all those that believe. Whoever believes, no matter what his antecedents and his history, by his faith receives what God offers, and thus becomes the possessor of this great blessing of the New Testament.

That there can be neither the merit of a natural excellency nor even that of the act of believing in the believers, is evident from the nest words of the apostle: For there is no difference, no distinction among men as to their relation toward God, for they all, also the believers, have sinned and are lacking the glory of God; they have no standing before God by nature, they have nothing that they can boast of before Him. It is because they are conscious of their own sinfulness and of their moral destitution before the omniscient and holy God that they cling to their Savior in faith and accept His righteousness, which makes them acceptable and just before God.

Justification is thus, as the apostle states, transmitted freely, as a gift, through the grace of God, which alone can be the source of mercy. And it is made possible through the redemption, literally, through the deliverance by the paying of ransom, of Jesus Christ. Jesus had redeemed us from all our sins and from the wrath of God by staking a price, a ransom, for our souls, Mat 20:28; Mar 10:45; 1Ti 2:6; Tit 2:14. And this price of ransom was none other than His own precious blood. Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1Pe 1:18-19. And the manner in which He paid this wonderful price is fully described. God has set Him forth as a mercy seat through faith in His blood; that was the purpose, the intention! of God as put into practice in the sacrifice of Calvary, Joh 3:14. Jesus is the true Mercy-seat, of whom the cover of the ark in the Most Holy Place was but a feeble type. Just as the high priest of the Old Testament, on the great Day of Atonement, sprinkled the blood of the sacrifice against the lid of the ark, thereby making reconciliation for the sins of the entire people. Lev 16:30, thus Jesus is the perfect Mercy seat in His own blood. High Priest, Sacrifice, and Mercy-seat in one person, Jesus has fulfilled all types of Old Testament sacrifices by the shedding of His holy blood as a ransom for the sins of the world. Thus He became the true Mediator between God and men, covering all our sin, guilt, shame, and nakedness before the eyes of God, and obtaining a perfect redemption for all men. And the reconciliation thus obtained becomes our possession and property by faith in His blood: God looks upon the precious blood of His Son, through which the sins of the whole world are expiated, through which all sinners are delivered from sin, guilt, wrath and damnation: and for the sake of this bloody sacrifice and perfect merit of Christ He pronounces the sinners just and holy.

Having set forth the nature and ground of the Gospel method of justification. Paul now states its object: For the declaration of His righteousness. God has set forth Jesus, His Son, the Redeemer, as the true Mercy-seat, is still setting Him forth before the eyes of the entire world of sinners, Gal 3:1, in order to show forth His righteousness. It was an act of the righteousness of God that He condemned His Son, the Substitute for all sinners, to the violent death of the cross; by setting forth Christ in His wounds and blood before the eyes of all men, He declared His righteousness before the whole world. The avenging righteousness and holiness of God could not be satisfied with less, it must demand the supreme sacrifice. And such an open declaration and demonstration of the essential righteousness of God was all the more necessary because of the passing over of the sins committed before in the forbearance of God. On account of the great patience and forbearance of God in the period before Christ the sins of men had remained unpunished, apart from a few extraordinary manifestations of God’s avenging justice, Act 14:16; Act 17:30. Even though death, the wages of sin, reigned from Adam to Christ, yet it was a time of comparative impunity, and it was a demonstration of the forbearance of God that sinful people could live years and generations in their sins before they were called away by death. But now, at the present time, in the new dispensation. God demonstrated His righteousness. The very act of overlooking the sins in the time before the advent of Christ had been done in view of this demonstration of His righteousness in the present time. During all the centuries before the coming of Christ, the divine justice, on account of the righteousness of God, had demanded the punishment of sinners. And the full punishment had been meted out to Christ, the Substitute for all sinners of all times. "The death of Christ vindicated the justice of God in forgiving sin in all ages of the world, since those sins were by the righteous God punished in Christ. " The punishment of the sinners which was taken over by Christ is full expiation for all sins; by His suffering and death He has paid the debt in full, He has exhausted wrath and judgment. And the setting forth of Christ as the true Mercy-seat was done finally for the purpose, in order to be Himself just and to justify him who is of the faith of Jesus, in demanding from Christ, the Substitute of sinners, the full payment of the guilt of sin, God proved Himself to be the Just One. And in sending forth Christ to make this vicarious sacrifice, and in being in Christ for the reconciliation of the world, God justified the sinners, pronounced them pure and righteous, the justification actually becoming the possession of him that accepts it by faith in Jesus, in whom this faith is characteristic, whose entire religious and moral nature has its source in his faith in Jesus.

Justification

The doctrine of the justification of a poor sinner before God is the central doctrine of Christian faith, the doctrine with which the Church stands and falls. "If this article of justification is lost, then there is lost at the same time the entire Christian doctrine... For in it are contained all the other articles of our faith, and if this one is considered in the right light, then all the others will be judged properly... If this article is put aside, then nothing remains but error, hypocrisy, godlessness, idolatry, no matter how much it may appear as the highest truth. " "From this article we can yield or recede nothing, no matter if heaven and earth fall and everything that will not remain. For there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved, says Peter, Act 4:12. And by His stripes we are healed, Isa 53:3. And upon this article everything rests that we teach and live against the Pope, devil, and the world. Therefore we must be altogether sure of it and not doubt, else everything is lost, and Pope and devil and everything will have and keep the victory and right against us."

Every effort has been made by the sectarians and false teachers to weaken the force of the glorious passage, 3:21-28. Some have maintained that the righteousness of God here referred to is merely the divine attribute, the justice, mercy, and general rectitude of God. If this were true, however, then this quality of God would be revealed outside of the Law, v. 22, and would become the actual property and attribute of the believer by faith, v. 23. Others have declared that the righteousness of God is the quality of being good, as demanded by the Law and wrought through the power of God in the hearts of men. But the righteousness spoken of in the text is revealed without the cooperation of the Law, and a perfect moral and civic righteousness is not possible without the Law as given by God. The righteousness which the apostle speaks of is one without the Law, with which the Law has nothing to do. It is God’s method of justification. "The method of justification by works being impossible, God has revealed another, already taught indeed, both in the Law and prophets, a method which is not legal (without Law), i. e. , not on the condition of obedience to the Law, but on the condition of faith, which is applicable to all men, and perfectly gratuitous. " Justification, therefore, is the act of God by which He declares a man to be righteous, pronounces him righteous, states that he is free from the sentence of condemnation, openly asserts that the accused is no longer guilty or worthy of punishment.

This justification, this merciful declaration of God, is imputed to the sinner by faith, Act 13:38-39, without the deeds of the Law. All merit on the part of man, both as to righteous deeds and a proper attitude toward God and His mercy, are excluded, and even faith itself as the fountain or root or germinating power of good works. Even when faith exercises its own peculiar office and quality, and in this way takes hold of, accepts, the grace of God and the righteousness of Christ, faith comes into consideration only inasmuch as it is the creation of God in the heart of man for the purpose of receiving the judgment of mercy. It is not the act of apprehending that justifies the believer, but only the thing which is apprehended. The factor that induces God to declare a man righteous and just is altogether and alone the object of faith. Truly, "by grace are ye saved, through faith; and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast," Eph 2:8-9. "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the Law; for by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified," Gal 2:16.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Section 1. (Rom 3:21-31.)

A propitiation, for grace in righteousness towards an.

The righteousness of God we have seen to be the power for salvation in the gospel. It is just that of which the convicted sinner is most afraid. He can believe that God is good; he can believe in His love to man; but that is not here the question. While careless himself, he could believe or hope that God would be found equally careless as to sin; but now the question of righteousness cannot so easily be settled; and God must be righteous in all He does. It is indeed the wonder of divine grace that it should reign through righteousness -that righteousness itself should provide and secure blessing for the lost and hopeless. And this is what we are now called to consider, -a righteousness which not only makes possible the security of all who flee for refuge to it, but absolutely ensures it. The procuring cause of this is a propitiation which displays fully God’s righteousness as to sin, so that there can be no more question of it when He receives the sinner, but the opposite: "He is faithful and just to forgive him his sins" (1Jn 1:9).

1. Law then is confessedly unable to produce any righteousness on man’s part which can be accepted of God, or enable him to stand before God. It has done its work in convicting of sin; and that in such sort that it is proved that man’s way of works can never avail for him: he can bring nothing that is not soiled by the hands that bring it. Thus his mouth is stopped: he cannot perform, nor therefore promise; he is helpless and hopeless; the account as to man is closed; he is simply in the hands of God, to do with him as He will.

If there is to be gospel, therefore, that is, "good news" for man, "apart from law" it must be. The law may witness to it, as it did, in its many types and shadows, in sacrifices which, as of bulls and goats, could never take away sin, but which thus by their own inefficacy pointed away from themselves to what they represented. The prophets amplified and made clearer these types of the law; and the hope of a Saviour to come grew through the ages of suspense.

But the time of expectation merely is over: "righteousness of God is now manifest through faith of Jesus Christ towards all, and over all them that believe." In the salvation of Israel yet to come, the Lord speaks through Isaiah of His righteousness as to be revealed (Isa 41:10; Isa 46:13; Isa 51:5-6; Isa 51:8; Isa 56:1). For a Jew, therefore, these thoughts could not be strange to bring together; and we must not fail to connect with such passages those which declared their righteousness to be of the Lord (Isa 45:24; Isa 54:17). These are not at all equivalent things, though they are things that would fit well together, to enable truly convicted souls to think peacefully of a day when God would act in righteousness and for the salvation of His people. But the salvation of Israel in the day to come is nevertheless very different from the gospel salvation with which we have here to do. Righteousness will be then displayed in judgment upon the foes of His earthly people; in the salvation here, though it act in judgment, yet only contrast is seen in this "strange work" indeed to which the Cross is witness. Here is a judgment upon sin which is the salvation of sinners! The apostle has already spoken of righteousness of God revealed in good news to man; here also, as there, it is through faith or upon that principle, that such a thing can be. It is thus towards all men, and therefore where faith is found, it is over all such as have it: that is, it becomes for such like the roof that shelters from the storm, or like the shield that turns off every arrow of the enemy.

That this is the true force of the statement will be clear, I think, if we take into consideration what it is connected with, as the apostle goes on to explain himself in what immediately follows. "Being justified," he says, "freely by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." Thus it is of justification that he is speaking, as plainly through all this part of Romans. This justification is by blood, or what is equivalent, "through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus;" and here is that in which God’s righteousness in justifying is declared. But justification is acquittal: it is from sin -from any charge of it -and it is divine righteousness that acts in justifying, righteousness is just that attribute of God which is concerned in it: thus it is like a broad, effectual shield stretched over the believer, and for all like a house that with its open door invites men to take shelter from the coming storm of judgment.

We must not make any confusion between this and the righteousness which is ours in Christ. The righteousness of God is not the robe that is put upon us, nor is that the theme in this first division of the epistle. In its nature also, the righteousness of God cannot be imputed to us; righteousness is imputed, as the apostle afterwards says, but that is another thing. "Over," therefore, rather than "upon," seems the proper rendering in this passage, which also seems preferable because it better implies the activity of God’s righteousness in justification. It is this that is directly and specifically concerned in a question of this nature. We hear it often put as if God’s being just and justifying meant His being just, though justifying; but that comes short of its proper force. For, as already said, in acquitting it is righteousness alone that has the case in hand. In forgiving love may act; but in justifying, righteousness. And this is what makes the question of such intense importance for the convicted soul, and sets it so perfectly at rest when the divine sentence is pronounced.

As to men in general, there is one need, and one gospel: "All have sinned," says the apostle; and then he brings forward once more the verdict of the law, which Israel so well knew: "all come short of the glory of God." That was what the veil hanging ever before the holiest, where God in very mercy to man must hide His glory from those who could not stand before Him, proved for those very people among whom He was pleased to dwell. Love came as near as it could come, and be love. And even to Moses, the mediator of the covenant, it had been said, "Thou canst not see My Face." Such was man at his best under the measurement of law, which, chosen by man in his self-confidence, darkened the glorious Face that longed to shine upon him. But now, when the full object of law has been attained, and its tale of man has been told out, the grace to which after all the law was meant to minister is free to show itself; condemned by law, we are "justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." Redemption, a "ransoming from," owns and meets the requirements of righteousness, delivering us from the condition of convicted men. The price is not yet stated, but being accepted and paid, righteousness has no further demands upon us, but is henceforth on our side: it now demands our discharge from every accusation, and in Christ Jesus is this redemption found.

Notice that it is already the risen Christ who is before us, as the order of the names distinctly indicates. Jesus was, as we know, the name given to Him at His birth, and is therefore His personal name as man; while Christ is His name of office upon which, His work of atonement being accomplished, He has now fully entered. Thus the precedence of either shows which is the predominant thought, whether Person or office. We are never said to be in Jesus, or in Jesus Christ; always in Christ, or in Christ Jesus. Here redemption is found for us in the Christ, who is Jesus, -in Him who has accomplished His work, and is in possession of the fruits of it.

Him has God set forth a propitiatory, through faith, by His blood; this, as the Revised Version has it, is no doubt preferable to the common one, which reads, "through faith in His blood." The word "propitiatory" is that used in the Septuagint for the "mercy-seat," as it is also in the epistle to the Hebrews (9: 5), the only place in which it is found again in the New Testament. The mercy seat was the place in Israel in which atonement, or propitiation was "set forth" as the formal basis upon which God dwelt in relation with a sinful people. It was the throne of God, where He dwelt between the cherubim, and was made a "mercy-seat" by the blood sprinkled upon it. Thus "a propitiatory by His blood" is right; faith being that by which it is available to us, who now have such a throne of grace, the antitype of that ancient one, really accessible, as for Israel that ancient one was not. We have boldness to enter into the holy places, (where the mercy-seat stood), and Christ gone in to God is He through whom "grace reigns through righteousness." The rent veil is here implied as the characteristic of Christianity, though the theme in Romans is not worship, as in Hebrews, but that acceptance with God which is fundamental to it. The gospel of the glory (Paul’s gospel) is thus in fact here.

The typical blood upon the mercy-seat had to be renewed year by year; for the past year it manifested God’s righteousness in having gone on with the people as He had done; while it displayed for the future the basis upon which He could still go on. This aspect of the day of atonement is surely that to which the apostle now refers, though the survey now is as much more extensive as the blood of this one offering goes beyond all merely anticipatory ones. The propitiatory now set forth declares God’s righteousness "in regard to the passing by of sins done aforetime, through the forbearance of God;" as well as His righteousness in the present time, "that He may be just, and justifying him who is of the faith of Jesus." That is, faith which has Jesus as its object.

The Cross stands thus among the ages with its light shining over the generations past, and more brightly in the present time. It is strange that the apostle’s words should have been taken, with the help of the misleading "I say," preserved in the Revised Version, to define the gospel justification as simply from past sins, leaving the future unassured to take care for itself. It is true, indeed, that one cannot speak of sins put away before they have been committed, and that the question of the future is not taken up as yet. But "the sins done aforetime" are not the sins of a man’s past life, but those of bygone ages, when yet the gospel was not, as now, declared, and sins for which the legal sacrifices had no provision could only be met by what was truly uncovenanted mercy. At the best also, there was and could be no inherent value in the blood of bulls and goats to take away sin. But how many questions did all this imply! How different from a sentence of justification, the hope of mercy! But now every question is answered, every shadow gone: Christ’s sacrifice has proclaimed God’s righteous judgment upon sin as nothing else could do; and enabled Him at the same time to justify him who is of the faith of Jesus.

2. Truth has wrought with grace: God could not justify man upon any ground which would give him opportunity for boasting. His principle of faith gives God, not man, the glory. That pride which is the devil’s own sin, and into which he has led mankind to imitate him, is broken down, not fostered, by a blessing so gained. A law, or principle, of works, if it had been possible in the nature of things for him to have been justified by it, could only have wrought disaster for him morally. Merit is not possible to a creature, from whom obedience is his constant due. "When ye have done all," says the Lord, "say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which it was our duty to do." No ladder of works, if it were long enough to reach to heaven, could give the spirit of worship which is in heaven, and which alone could make it heaven at all. Faith has a moral quality which makes it worthy to be God’s principle: it glorifies Him and blesses man, while the ruin of his self-confidence prepares him for it. It suits also a God to whom all His creatures are alike a care. A faith which can grow out of one’s own nothingness, the babe characteristic, needing not the wisdom of the wise, nor power of any kind, but according to which are chosen the foolish things, and the weak, and the base, and the despised, manifests One before whose greatness, and to whose love, the lowest is as the highest. In the adoption of such a principle none that do not banish themselves are banished from Him: for the highest can come down to the lowest level, when it would be impossible for the lowest to rise up to the highest. Man naturally thinks that God should be found most on the mountain tops; but the sun warms most the lower plains upon which men build their cities and live their daily lives. How would the most expert climbers of the peaks enjoy having these things reversed? Nay, the highest peaks send down their tribute of enrichment to the plains, and nature is in harmony with her glorious Maker.

So says the apostle here: "We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law." The very exclusiveness of the law, which was the boast of the Jew, was thus the witness that it was not after all the way of blessing. Could God have thus forgotten the Gentile? "Is He the God of Jews only? is He not also of the Gentiles?" What can one answer? what but with the apostle: "Yea, of the Gentiles also; since it is one God who will justify the circumcision by faith" -upon that principle; and then, and thus, if he be found possessor of it, the "uncircumcision through" that "faith" which he possesses. God is drawing near to men would it be a greater and better thing to say, to the Jew? One might better plead for him the exclusive right to sun and rain, or to those blessings which the more necessary they are, the more widely they are found diffused.

But then, says the objector, you are making the law to be of no effect through this advocacy of faith. As if the sowing of the field showed the plow to have been vainly used! "Far be the thought," says the apostle: "nay, but we establish law." For the real purpose for which God gave it, the law still abides, and its use is clearly manifested.

F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible (4th ed., 1903) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter 9

THE ONE WAY OF DIVINE ACCEPTANCE

Rom_3:21-31

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 writers and the readers, 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, Gods 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) Gods 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 sinners 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 it 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 Redeemers 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 hearts 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 Anothers 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 faiths 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 Redeemers 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 mans 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 worlds 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 ROMANS 3

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. Augustines 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 Cowpers 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."

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

3:21–4:25 Paul returns to the central theme of the righteousness of God that is revealed in Christ and is available to anyone who believes. The fundamental statement of this theology is in 3:21-26; Paul elaborates on it in 3:27-31 and illustrates it with the experience of Abraham in ch 4.

3:21-22 After a lengthy reminder of the power of sin (1:18–3:20), Paul returns to the theme presented in 1:17, the way to be made right with God (literally the righteousness of God). As in that verse, “the righteousness of God” is the way that God puts people in right relationship with himself. • without keeping the requirements of the law (literally apart from the law): The old covenant looked forward to the climactic revelation of God’s righteousness in his Son. Because of what God has accomplished for us in Christ by completely fulfilling the requirements of the law, we are now able to come to him by faith, apart from the covenant structure set up by the law of Moses (cp. Heb 8:13).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rom 3:21. Νυνί) now [as it is] forms the antithesis, including the idea of time, Rom 3:26.—χωρὶς νόμου—ὑπο τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῶν προφητῶν, without the law—by the law and the prophets) A sweet antithesis. The law is taken both in a limited and extended sense [David, for instance, must be reckoned among the prophets, ch. Rom 4:6.—V. g.].—πεφανέρωται, has been manifested) by the Gospel of Jesus Christ.—μαρτυρουμένη, being witnessed by, having the testimony of) according to [by] promise.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_3:21.[810] Νυνί is usually interpreted here as a pure adverb of time (nostris temporibus hac in parte felicissimis, Grotius). So also Tholuck, Reiche, Rückert, Olshausen, Baumgarten-Crusius, Winzer, Reithmayr, Philippi, van Hengel, Mehring, Th. Schott, and others. But since what precedes was not given as a delineation of the past, there appears here not the contrast between two periods, but that between two relations, the relation of dependence on the law and the relation of independence on the law (διὰ νόμου.… χωρίς νόμου). Hence with Beza, Pareus, Piscator, Estius, Koppe, Fritzsche, de Wette, Matthias, and Hofmann, we render: but in this state of the case. See regarding this dialectic use of the νῦν Hartung, Partikell. II. p. 25; Baeuml. Part. p. 95; Ellendt, Lex. Soph. II. p. 181. Comp Rom_7:17; 1Co_5:11; 1Co_12:18; 1Co_13:13, al[812]; 4Ma_6:33; 4Ma_13:3. By Greek authors ΝΥΝΊ is not thus used, only ΝῦΝ.

ΧΩΡΊς ΝΌΜΟΥ] placed with full emphasis at the beginning as the opposite of ΔΙᾺ ΝΌΜΟΥ, belongs to ΠΕΦΑΝ. Aptly rendered by Luther: without the accessory aid of the law, i.e. so that in this revelation of the righteousness of God the law is left out of account. Reiche (following Augustine, de grat. Chr. 1, 8, and de spir. et. lit. 9, Wolf, and others) joins it with δικαιοσ.: the righteousness of God as being imparted to the believer without the law, without the Mosaic law helping him thereto. Compare also Winzer, Klee, Mehring. But apart from the coactior constructio, with which Estius already found fault, we may urge against this view the parallel of διὰ νόμου, Rom_3:20, which words also do not belong to ἘΠΊΓΝΩΣΙς ἉΜΑΡΤ. but to the verb to be supplied.

ΠΕΦΑΝΈΡΩΤΑΙ] is made manifest and lies open to view, so that it presents itself to the knowledge of every one; the present of the completed action, Heb_9:26. The expression itself presupposes the previous κρυπτόν (Col_3:3 f.; Mar_4:22), the having been hidden, in accordance with which the righteousness of God has not yet been the object of experimental perception. To men it was an unknown treasure. The mode of the πεφανέρωται however consists in the ΔΙΚΑΙΟΣ. ΘΕΟῦ having become actual, having passed into historical reality, and having been made apparent, which has been accomplished without mixing up the law as a co-operative factor in the matter.

μαρτυρ. ὑπὸ τ. νόμ. κ. τ. προφ.] An accompanying characteristic definition of ΔΙΚΑΙΟΣΎΝΗ ΘΕΟῦ, so far as the latter is made manifest: being witnessed, etc. If it is thus the case with regard to it, that in its πεφανέρωται it is attested by the witness of the law and the prophets, then this precludes the misconception that the ΔΙΚΑΙΟΣΎΝΗ revealed ΧΩΡΊς ΝΌΜΟΥ is opposed or foreign to the O. T., and consequently an innovation without a background in sacred history. Comp Rom_16:26; Joh_5:39. Novum testamentum in vetere latet, vetus in novo patet, Augustine. In this case we are not to think of the moral requirements (Th. Schott), but of the collective Messianic types, promises and prophecies in the law and the prophets, in which is also necessarily comprised the δικαιοσύνη Θεοῦ as that which is necessary to participation in the Messianic salvation. Comp Rom_1:2, Rom_3:2; Act_10:43; Act_28:23; Luk_24:27; from the law, the testimony of Abraham, Rom_4:3 ff. and the testimonies quoted in Rom_10:6 ff.

Observe further that ΜΑΡΤΥΡΟΥΜ. has the emphasis, in contrast to ΧΩΡΊς, not ὙΠῸ ΤΟῦ ΝΌΜΟΥ (Bengel, Fritzsche and others). We may add Bengels apt remark: Lex stricte (namely, in χωρίς νόμου) et late (in ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου) dicitur.

[810] See Winzer, Comm. in Rom. iii. 2128, Partic. I. and II. 1829.

[812] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

Rom_3:21-30. Paul has hitherto been proving that all men are under sin, and guilty before God. This was the preparatory portion of the detailed illustration of the theme set forth in ch. Rom_1:17; for before anything else there had to be recognised the general necessity of a δικαιοσύνη not founded on the lawas indeed such a legal righteousness has shown itself to be impossible. Now however he exhibits this δικαιοσύνη provided from another sourcethe righteousness of God which comes from faith to all without distinction, to believing Jews and Gentiles. Hofmann rejects this division, in consequence of his having erroneously taken προεχόμεθα in Rom_3:9 as the utterance of the Christians. He thinks that the Apostle only now comes to the conclusion, at which he has been aiming ever since the fifth verse: as to what makes Christians, as distinguished from others, assured of salvation.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 3:21-26 . The universal need of a Gospel has now been demonstrated, and the Apostle proceeds with his exposition of this Gospel itself. It brings what all men need, a righteousness of God (see on Rom 1:17 ); and it brings it in such a way as to make it accessible to all. Law contributes nothing to it, though it is attested by the law and the prophets; it is a righteousness which is all of grace. Grace, however, does not signify that moral distinctions are ignored in God’s procedure: the righteousness which is held out in the Gospel is held out on the basis of the redemption which is in Christ Jesus. It is put within the sinner’s reach at a great cost. It could never be offered to him it could never be manifested, or indeed have any real existence but for the propitiatory virtue of the blood of Christ. Christ a propitiation is the inmost soul of the Gospel for sinful men. If God had not set Him forth in this character, not only must we despair for ever of attaining to a Divine righteousness; all our attempts to read the story of the world in any consistency with the character of God must be baffled. Past sins God seemed simply to ignore: He treated them apparently as if they were not. But the Cross is “the Divine theodicy for the past history of the world” (Tholuck); we see in it how seriously God deals with the sins which for the time He seemed to pass by. It is a demonstration of His righteousness that is, in the widest sense, of His consistency with His own character, which would have been violated by indifference to sin. And that demonstration is, by God’s grace, given in such a way that it is possible for Him to be (as He intends to be) at once just Himself, and the justifier of those who believe in Jesus. The propitiatory death of Jesus, in other words, is at once the vindication of God and the salvation of man. That is why it is central and fundamental in the Apostolic Gospel. It meets the requirements, at the same time, of the righteousness of God and of the sin of man.

Rom 3:21 . νυνὶ δὲ : but now. All time is divided for Paul into “now” and “then”. Cf. Eph 2:12 f., τῷ καιρῷ ἐκείνῳ … νυνὶ δέ ; 2Co 5:16 , ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν : the reception of the Gospel means the coming of a new world. χωρὶς νόμου : legal obedience contributes nothing to evangelic righteousness. It is plain that in this expression νόμος does not signify the O.T. revelation or religion as such, but that religion, or any other, conceived as embodied in statutes. It is statutory obedience which (as Paul has learned by experience) cannot justify. Hence νόμος has not exactly the same sense here as in the next clause, ὑπὸ τοῦ νὸμον κ . τῶν προφητῶν , where the whole expression is equal to the O.T., and the meaning is that the Gospel is not alien to the religion of Israel, but really finds attestation there. This is worth remarking, because there is a similar variation in the meaning of δικαιοσύνη between Rom 3:21 ; Rom 3:25 , and in that of ἡ δόξα τοῦ θεοῦ between Rom 3:23 and Rom 5:2 . To deny that words which mean so much, and are applied so variously, can convey different shades of meaning, even within the narrow limits of a few verses, is to deny that language shares in the life and subtlety of the mind. πεφανέρωται : once for all the righteousness of God has been revealed in the Gospel. Cf. Rom 16:26 , Col 1:26 , 2Ti 1:10 , 1Pe 1:20 , Heb 9:8 ; Heb 9:26 .

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Eighth Passage (3:21-26). The Fact by which Justification by Faith is acquired for us.

We have already proved that Rom 3:21 is directly connected in sense with Rom 1:17 (see p. 99). In the interval from. 18 to Rom 3:20, the apostle has shown that the wrath of God rests on mankind, whence it follows that if the world is not to perish, a divine manifestation of an opposite kind, and able to overcome the first, is indispensable. It is this new revelation which forms the subject of the following passage. Vv.21 and 22 contain the theme of the first piece, and at the same time of the whole section. Rom 3:23 once more sums up the thought of the preceding section; and Rom 3:24-26 are the development of the subject, the exposition of the new way of justification.

Vv. 21, 22a. “But now the righteousness of God is manifested without the law, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God by faith in Jesus Christ for all and upon all them that believe.”

The δέ, but, is strongly adversative; it contrasts the revelation of righteousness with that of wrath. The former is presented as a new fact in the history of mankind; so that one might be led to give the word now a temporal sense; comp. the at this time, Rom 3:26, and Act 17:30. This, however, is only apparent. The contrast with the preceding is moral rather than temporal; it is the contrast between the condemnation pronounced by the law (Rom 3:20) and the new righteousness acquired without the law (Rom 3:21). It is therefore better to give the word now the logical meaning which it has so frequently in the New Testament (Rom 7:17; 1Co 13:12; 1Co 14:6, etc.) and in the classics: “The situation being such.” The words: without the law, stand foremost, as having the emphasis. They evidently depend on the verb is manifested, and not on the word righteousness (a righteousness without law, Aug.). The absence of the article before the word law does not prove that the apostle does not mean the term to denote the Mosaic law; only the law is excluded from co-operating in the new righteousness not because it is Mosaic, but because it is law. Under the old dispensation, righteousness came to man through the thousand channels of legalism; in the new, righteousness is given him without the least co-operation of what can be called a law.

We know what Paul calls the righteousness of God: it is the state of reconciliation with God in which man is placed by the sentence which declares him just (see on Rom 1:17).

The verb φανεροῦν, to put in the light, differs from the verb ἀποκαλύπτειν, to reveal, used Rom 1:17, in the figure, not in the sense. The second applies to an object which was hidden by a veil, and which is made known by withdrawing the veil; the former, to an object placed in the shade, and on which rays of light are let fall. The only real difference from Rom 1:17 is therefore this: there, the verb was in the present, for it denoted the permanent revelation of the gospel by means of evangelical preaching; while here, the verb is in the perfect, because it refers, as Morison says, “to the fact itself, which that preaching proclaims.” That fact now finished is the subject expounded in Rom 3:25-26; it is through it that the righteousness of God is set in the light for all times.

But if legal observances are excluded from all co-operation in this righteousness, it does not follow that the latter is in contradiction to the Old Testament revelation in its double form of law and prophecy. These two manifestations of the divine will, commandment, and promise, understood in their true sense, contain, on the contrary, the confirmation of the righteousness of faith, as the apostle will prove in the sequel of this section, Rom 3:27 to Rom 4:25. The law by unveiling sin opens up the void in the heart, which is filled by the righteousness of faith; prophecy completes the work of preparation by promising this righteousness. Thus there is no objection to be drawn from the old revelation against the new. As the new fulfils the old, the latter confirms the former.

Second section. 3:21-5:11. Justification by Faith Acquired for the Whole World.

In this section, which forms the counterpart of the preceding, three principal ideas are developed.

1. The historical fact by which justification by faith is acquired for the world, Rom 3:21-26.

2. The harmony of this mode of justification with the revelation of the Old Testament, Rom 3:27 to Rom 4:25.

3. The certainty of justification, not for the present only, but for all the future, embracing the last judgment,Rom 5:1-11.

Thus the sentence of condemnation is effaced by that of absolution.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_3:21-31

Analysis

Having proved that justification, on the ground of legal obedience or personal merit, is for all men impossible, Paul proceeds to unfold the method of salvation presented in the gospel. With regard to this method, he here teaches,

1. Its nature.

2. The ground on which the offer of justification is made.

3. Its object.

4. Its results.

I. As to its nature, he teaches,

1. That the righteousness which it proposes is not attainable by works, but by faith, Rom_3:21, Rom_3:22.

2. That it is adapted to all men, Jews as well as Gentiles, since there is no difference as to their moral state, Rom_3:22, Rom_3:23.

3 It is entirely gratuitous, Rom_3:24.

II. As to its ground, it is the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, or Jesus Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice, Rom_3:24, Rom_3:25.

III. Its object is the display of the divine perfections, and the reconciliation of the justice of God with the exhibition of mercy to the sinner, Rom_3:26.

IV. Its results.

1. It humbles man by excluding all ground of boasting, Rom_3:27, Rom_3:28.

2. It presents God in his true character as the God and father of all men, of the Gentile no less than of the Jews. Rom_3:29, Rom_3:30.

3. It confirms the law, Rom_3:31.

Commentary

Rom_3:21

But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, etc. Having demonstrated that no flesh can be justified by the deeds of the law in the sight of God, the apostle proceeds to show how the sinner can be justified. With regard to this point, he teaches, in this verse,

1. That the righteousness which is acceptable to God is not a legal righteousness; and,

2. That it had been taught already in the Old Testament

The words but now may be regarded as merely marking the transition from one paragraph to another, or as a designation of time, now, i.e. under the gospel dispensation. In favor of this view is the phrase, to declare, at this time, his righteousness, in Rom_3:26; compare also Rom_1:17. Is manifested, i.e. clearly made known, equivalent to the phrase is revealed, as used in Rom_1:17. The words righteousness of God, are subjected here to the same diversity of interpretation that was noticed in the passage just cited, where they first occur. They may mean,

1. A divine attribute, the justice, mercy, or general rectitude of God.

2. That righteousness which is acceptable to God, which is such in his estimation.

3. Gods method of justification; compare Rom_1:17.

The last interpretation gives here a very good sense, and is one very commonly adopted. The method of justification by works being impossible, God has revealed another, already taught indeed, both in the law and prophets, a method which is not legal (without law), i.e. not on the condition of obedience to the law, but on the condition of faith, which is applicable to all men, and perfectly gratuitous, Rom_3:21-24. But for the reason stated above, in the remarks on Rom_1:17, the interpretation which best suits both the force of the words and Pauls usage is, The righteousness of which God is the author, which comes from him, which he gives, and which consequently is acceptable in his sight. The word righteousness is employed to designate that excellence which the law demands, or which constitutes a man δίκαιος; (righteous) in the sight of the law, and the genitive (τοῦ Θεοῦ) of God, indicates the source or author of that righteousness. As men therefore cannot attain such righteousness by the deeds of the law, God has revealed in the gospel another righteousness, which is not legal, but is attained or received by faith, and is offered to all men, whether Jews or Gentiles, as a free gift. The words χωρὶς νόμου, without law, may qualify the word righteousness. It is a righteousness without law, or with which the law has nothing to do. It is not a product of the law, and does not consist in our inward conformity to its precepts; so that χωρὶς νόμου is equivalent to χωρὶς ἔργων νόμου, Gal_2:16. The connection however may be with the verb: Without the law (i.e. without the cooperation of the law) the righteousness of God is revealed. But the whole context treats of justification without works, and therefore the interpretation which makes the apostle say that a righteousness without the works of the law is made known in the gospel, is more suited to the connection. The perfect πεφανέρωται has its appropriate force. The revelation has been made and still continues. This righteousness, which, so to speak, had long been buried under the types and indistinct utterances of the old dispensation, has now in the gospel been made (φανερά) clear and apparent. The apostle therefore adds, being testified by the law and the prophets. The word is, μαρτυρουμένη, being testified to; the present is used because the testimony of the Old Testament to the gospel was still continued. The Jews were accustomed to divide the Scriptures into two parts the Law including the five books of Moses, and the Prophets including all the other books. The word prophet means one who speaks for God. All inspired men are prophets, and therefore the designation applies to the historical, as well as to the books which we are accustomed, in a more restricted sense of the word, to call prophetical. The Law and the Prophets therefore mean the Old Testament Scriptures. Mat_5:17, Mat_7:12, Luk_16:31, Act_13:15, etc. The words designated a well known volume, and had to the minds of the Jews as definite a meaning as the word Bible has with us. The constant recognition of that volume in the New Testament as of divine authority, relieves us of the necessity of proving separately the inspiration of its several books. In sanctioning the volume as the word of God, Christ and his apostles gave their sanction to the divine authority of all that the volume contains. That the Old Testament does teach the doctrine of a righteousness without works, Paul proves in the next chapter, from the case of Abraham, and from the declarations of David.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Therefore saith the Apostle, Lest that men should perish, God doth now exhibit that, which he promised of old, that is to say, a way whereby we may be justified and saved before him without the Law.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Verse 21. 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.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

21. 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’s 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. Again, since this is a definition of the righteousness of faith, “Blessed 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. Hence, in another place, after having taught us that God is in Christ justifying men, he expresses the manner, — “by 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, (Galatians 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; and freely, 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 — “Blessed 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 for but. 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, 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’s 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. When you come to the Prophets you will find the clearest promises of gratuitous mercy. On this subject see my Institutes.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(21) But now.—In these latter days. The Apostle conceives of the history of the world as divided into periods; the period of the Gospel succeeds that of the Law, and to it the Apostle and his readers belong. (Comp. for this conception of the gospel, as manifested at a particular epoch of time, Rom_16:25-26; Act_17:30; Gal_3:23; Gal_3:25; Gal_4:3-4; Eph_1:10; Eph_2:12-13; Col_1:21; Col_1:26; 1Ti_2:6; 2Ti_1:10; Heb_1:1; 1Pe_1:20.)

The righteousness of God.—Rather, a righteousness of God—i.e., “bestowed by God,” “wrought out by Him,” as in Rom_1:17. The reference is again, here as there, to the root-conception of righteousness as at once the great object and condition of the Messianic kingdom.

Without the law.—In complete independence of any law, though borne witness to by the Law of Moses. The new system is one into which the idea of law does not enter.

Is manifested.—Hath been, and continues to be manifested. The initial moment is that of the appearance of Christ upon earth. The scheme which then began is still evolving itself.

Being witnessed.—The Apostle does not lose sight of the preparatory function of the older dispensation, and of its radical affinity to the new. (Comp. Rom_1:2; Rom_16:26; Luk_18:31; Luk_24:27; Luk_24:44; Luk_24:46; Joh_5:39; Joh_5:46; Act_2:25; Act_2:31; Act_3:22; Act_3:24; Act_17:2-3; Act_26:22-23; 1Pe_1:10-11.)

(21-22) Such was the condition of the world up to the coming of Christ. But now, in contrast with the previous state of things, a new system has appeared upon the scene. In this system law is entirely put on one side, though the system itself was anticipated in and is attested by those very writings in which the Law was embodied. Law is now superseded, the great end of the Law, the introduction of righteousness, being accomplished in another way, viz., through faith in Christ, by which a state of righteousness is superinduced upon all believers.

(21-26) This then introduces the solemn enunciation, repeated more fully from Rom_1:16-17, of the great subject of the Epistle, the declaration of that new scheme by which, through Christ, God had removed the guilt which the Law (whether Jewish or any other) could not remove.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21–31. The Divine method of holy pardon, alike for all

21. But now] i.e. “But as things are, as the fact is.”

Here the great argument of Pardon and Salvation begins, to close with the triumphant words of Rom_8:37-39.

the righteousness of God] See note on Rom_1:17. In Rom_3:5 this phrase had a reference different from that of most other passages in this Epistle[35]. Its meaning in that verse is modified and determined by the words “our unrighteousness,” which, by contrast, fix it to mean there the Divine veracity and fidelity. Here, and through the rest of this argument, it means the divinely-granted, and righteous, acceptance of believers.

[35] See however the footnote there.

without the law] “Apart from the code of precepts.” The best comment on this most important phrase is the rest of this chapter and Rom_4:4-8. The very essence of the argument here demands that the words should mean “to the total exclusion of any work of obedience of man’s from the matter of his justification.”

is manifested] Lit. has been manifested; i.e. historically, “by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ.” 2Ti_1:10.

witnessed by the law and the prophets] Its reality and virtue is by them attested, confirmed, to those who accept the O. T. as the Word of God.—“The Law” is here, by the context, the Pentateuch, with its prophecies of redemption, and its Levitical ritual, priesthood, and tabernacle, all which was (see the Epistle to the Hebrews) a “prophecy in act” of the “better things to come.”—“The Prophets,” including the Psalter, are full not only of direct predictions of the Redeemer and His Work, but of language of love and pardon from the Holy One which only that Work can reconcile with the awful sanctions of the moral law.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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 "the mercy seat", by; and Philo the Jew calls it by the same name, and says it was a symbol, "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.

(b) Philo de Vita Mosis, l. 3. p. 668.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

Ver. 21. But now] Since Christ came.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

But now: q.d. Though justification be not by the law, yet it is to be obtained in another way, as follows.

The righteousness of God: see Rom 1:17.

Without the law; inasmuch as the law, pressing obedience to be performed by us in our own persons, seems plainly ignorant of the righteousness of another imputed to us.

Is manifested; this righteousness nevertheless is revealed plainly, now since the coming of Christ, and in the gospel, as in Rom 1:17.

Being witnessed by the law and the prophets; that there may be no suspicion of novelty: see Joh 5:46,47. The testimonies be refers to are very numerous: see Gen 3:15; 15:6; 22:17,18; Isa 53; Jer 31:31,33; Da 9:24,25. See the same argument used, Act 24:14; 26:22; 28:23.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vers. 21-31. (4) The righteousness of God, manifested in Christ and apprehended by faith, is the sole remedy, and available for all. The position enunciated in Rom_1:18 being now sufficiently established, the apostle enters here on his main argument, announced in Rom_1:17.

But now (nuni here may have either its temporal sense of at the present time, or its logical sense of as things are. For its use in the latter sense, cf. Rom_7:17 1Co_5:11 1Co_13:13 1Co_15:20) the righteousness of God without law (i.e. apart from law) is (or, has been) manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the prophets. On the essential meaning of God"s righteousness (Yeou dikaiosunh), 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 vers. 25, 26, where dikaiosunh autou evidently means God"s own righteousness, as also above, ver. 5. If this view is correct, there is no need to follow commentators into their discussions of the significance of cwrimou 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 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 dikaiosunh ; 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 nomou 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 Ro 4.

Vers. 21-26. "No difference.

The Bible presents us with three pictures of man"s condition and character. They are very different, and yet they are all true pictures. There is the picture of man before the Fall, as he walked with God in primeval innocence of heart and sinless purity of life. There is the picture of man after the Fall, with the Divine image marred and stained by sin. And then there is the picture of man renewed again man an object of Divine mercy, man a subject of Divine grace, man prepared for sharing once more the Divine glory. Two of these views of human nature concern man as he is now. The one humbles, the other exalts him. On the one hand, man is put before us as he is by nature fallen, sinful, lost. On the other hand, he is put before us as God wants him to be, and as God has done all he can to make him a pardoned sinner, a holy character, an heir of everlasting life. These two views are brought together in these verses. The apostle speaks of the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe (vers. 21, 22). And then he adds, as a reason for this broad, all-embracing statement, "For there is no difference: for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (vers. 22, 23). There is no difference as to the fact of universal sin. And there is no difference as to the fact of universal mercy: "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (ver. 24). There is no difference as to the need of salvation. There is no difference in the way of salvation. Christ is the Saviour of all men who come to him in faith.

I THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THE FACT OF UNIVERSAL GUILT. "All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." This is not a mere cynical statement. The Bible is not a cynical book. It does not look down with contempt upon human nature. But it deals with facts as they are. And yet, if it speaks of human nature as sinful, it is in terms of pity and compassion and desire to save. You will often meet with cynical views of human nature. You will meet some who will tell you that all men are equally bad, or that one man is as good as another. You will meet some who will sneer at the idea of virtue, or unselfishness, or honesty being found in any one. They will tell you that no such thing exists. They will tell you that selfishness is the ruling principle of human nature, and that, if men or women are honest, or virtuous, or charitable, it is because it is their interest to be so. Now, it will generally be found that those who speak thus of human nature have not a very high moral character of their own. They judge others from their own standpoint. They look at everything from a selfish point of view, and they think that every one else does the same. But this is not the way in which the Bible speaks of human nature. It paints it very black, it is true because it paints it in its true colours. But it speaks of human nature as it is, not to depreciate it, but to elevate it. Moreover, it allows for the good that is in human nature. It meets human nature halfway. It recognizes that there is sometimes even in the most fallen nature a desire for better things. It represents the poor prodigal as coming to himself and saying, "I will arise, and go to my Father." Jesus says," Him that cometh to me! will in no wise cast out." The Bible is no cynical book. And yet it says that "all have sinned." This does not mean that all are equally bad, that all have committed sins of the deepest dye. But it does mean just what is said, that all have sinned that there is sin in some degree in all, sin enough to condemn, to destroy. How humbling this is to human pride! And this was just how the apostle meant it. His whole desire in these opening chapters of Romans is to show the need of a Saviour, of a perfect righteousness. He first of all showed that the heathen needed a righteousness. Then, turning to the Jews, whom he knew so well, he saw at once their self-righteous spirit. They made their beast in the Law, and yet all the while they were transgressors of the Law. And so he proves that both Jews and Gentiles are all under sin (ver. 9). "For there is no difference: for all have sinned." It is amazing to see how one professing Christian can look down upon another, just because the other is of a humbler class in society or wears a poorer dress, when, if they were true Christians, they would remember that they are all sinners saved by grace. Yes; the Bible is a very democratic book. It teaches that God hath made of one blood all nations of men to dwell upon the face of the earth. It teaches that the rich and poor meet together, and that God is the Maker of them all. But it does not, like many democratic leaders, give the people a false idea of themselves. It does not say, as I once heard a popular speaker say in Glasgow, that "the democracy is always wise and true and just." It places all men upon a common platform, as sinners in the sight of God. It says, There is no difference: for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.

II THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THE OFFER OF UNIVERSAL MERCY. "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." It is when we come to look at the cross of Jesus that we can see how God looks at human nature. It was certainly no depreciation of human nature that caused the Son of God to come and die upon the cross. It was no desire to depreciate human nature that caused God to give "his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Ah no! When we speak of the depravity of human nature, of the fall of man, of universal guilt and sinfulness, some persons would charge us with taking low views of human nature. They are Bible views, at any rate; and the cross of Jesus shows us that, if God looks upon human nature as fallen, he does not look upon it with contempt. No! He looks upon it with infinite compassion. He looks upon it with redeeming love. He looks upon it, helpless, sinful, fallen; and as he looks, he stretches down the hand of mercy to save, to save for ever! On the porch of an old house in England is this inscription cut in stone, Dextram cadenti porrigo" ("I stretch out my right hand to him that is falling"). That is just what God does. He stretches out the strong hand of mercy, and not only to him that is falling, but to him that is fallen. He does not exclude the profligate, or there would have been no place in the kingdom of heaven for St. Augustine or John Newton. He does not offer salvation only to his friends, or where would the Apostle Paul have been? There is no difference. "Whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely." How, then, is this, that the guilty sinner is an object of Divine mercy? He is guilty, and yet God not merely pardons, but justifies him, declares him just. "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (ver. 24). It is on account of what Jesus did and suffered that the sinner is accepted in God"s sight. This is to be remembered, that Jesus not only bore our punishment (which one human being might do for another), but he bore our guilt. "The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." It is thus that the sinner is looked upon as justified in God"s sight. Thus God"s righteousness is shown: "That he might be just, and the Justifier of him which believeth in Jesus" (ver. 26). And hence there is no difference. It is no merit in man, no penances, no good works of his own, that obtain his justification, his salvation. It is free grace. It is the righteousness that is in Jesus Christ. What large-hearted charity, what universal brotherhood of Christians, this large view of God"s universal mercy ought to teach us! "The same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him." How this view of the universal mercy, the universal love of God, should break down all narrow views of creed and party and class! The day is long in coming, but surely, under the influence of this Christian gospel, it will come at last"When man to man, the world o"er, Shall brithers be for a" that.

Yet it is to be observed that there is a great difference in man"s treatment of this universal offer of mercy. Some accept the message. The goodness of God leads them to repentance. The love of Christ melts their hearts. Some reject this message. They put it away from them. They neglect it. They are too much occupied with other things with pleasure, moneymaking, and the like. Now, this difference in the way in which men receive the offer of salvation will make a vast difference in their condition throughout eternity. How could it be otherwise? If Christ died to save those who take him as their Saviour, it must be a sad but stern reality that those who do not believe on him must perish. There is no difference in the universal guilt. There is no difference in God"s universal offer of his mercy. But there is a difference in man"s treatment of this offer. And there will be an awful difference throughout eternity. C.H.I

Vers. 21-26. Redemption working righteousness.

A whole system of theology is compacted into these few words. The keystone of the arch. We have here redemption; righteousness.

I REDEMPTION. The redemption centres in Christ; it touches on either side God and man. Originating in the purposes of God, and actualized in the work of Christ, it is appropriated in the consciousness of man. These verses deal with one aspect of Christ"s work and of man"s salvation justification through Christ"s atoning sacrifice. Hence we have God"s grace, Christ"s sacrifice, man"s faith.

1. God"s grace. (Ver. 24) This is the fountain-head, whence all salvation issues. Importance of holding forth this truth; not that God loves us because Christ died, but that Christ died because God loved us. So Joh_3:16. And yet the error has some element of truth. It was God"s compassionate love which prompted the bestowal of the gift, and the "setting forth" of the Propitiation (ver. 25); but only when the gut has been received, and the propitiation made ours through faith, does God, can God, love with an intimate, complacent love. First the pitying Father, then the forgiving Father, and then the reconciled, rejoicing Father.

2. Christ"s sacrifice. (Ver. 25) We are in the presence of a mystery, which we may not analyze too closely. In Christ, God and man are one, and therefore the sacrifice of Christ represents a sacrifice of God and a sacrifice of man. In him, man expiates his own sin; in him, the Infinite Love stoops and suffers and dies. It was a real atonement of the race; it was a real atonement for the race; and what God hath joined we may not put asunder.

3. Man"s faith. (Vers. 22, 25, 26) To reduce it to its simplest, ultimate form, it is but the acceptance of what God gives, of what can only come to us from without, apart from any efforts of our own (ver. 21), "freely" (ver. 24). And such faith is virtually included in true penitence the penitence of the "poor in spirit;" and, we doubt not, such true penitence is therefore virtually in possession of the pardon which hovers round every repentant heart. But, for a consciousness of pardon, there is required a conscious faith, i.e. an intelligent, glad acceptance of the gift of God in Christ. And the more vivid and realistic the consciousness of faith or, may we say, the more strong and energetic the laying hold of life? the stronger and more joyous wilt be the experience of salvation, and the resultant love for God through Christ.

II RIGHTEOUSNESS. Redemption and righteousness are not at variance, but rather redemption is the great instrumentality whereby the righteousness of God works the righteousness of man.

1. Man"s righteousness. Man"s righteousness is wrought by the redemption of Christ, and therefore it is all Divine (vers. 21, 22). And yet it is truly man"s. The righteousness which is expressly spoken of here is a relative, not an actual, righteousness; i.e. a condition of acquittal in presence of Law and judgment. Hence the specific term, "justification" Such relative righteousness may be the adjunct of actual righteousness; the Law must acquit those who have perfectly fulfilled the Law. But can it be so with man? "All have sinned." And even one sin destroys all possibility of acquittal this way. Therefore only by some extraneous, some substitutionary satisfaction of Law, can man be justified. Such satisfaction the redemption of Christ provides. He represents us all in the great atonement before God, and when we penitently acknowledge his representation and accept it, the satisfaction made by him is ours. The Law of the Jews was the discipline by which God was leading them to feel their need of a righteousness "apart from Law;" the prophets promised it. But since all need it, Gentiles as well as Jews, it is for all; "there is no distinction.

2. God"s righteousness. Man"s righteousness and God"s are intervolved. Mere pardon would not set aside the claims of Law; justification respects those claims. The righteousness of God is his executive holiness the active upholding of Law. It can only be manifested in the case of sin by punishment. This punishment must be of the individual offenders, or of some proper substitute. In Christ the great Head of the race is smitten smitten that the race may be justified. But only a relative righteousness, as productive again of actual righteousness, can be wrought by the righteousness of God; and therefore the justification is for penitents, believing in Christ. And the very faith itself of penitents in a Christ who died for sin, is the germ of a new righteousness of life. So, then, does God justify himself in justifying the ungodly; and so does he justify his past forbearance, whether as respects the world or the individual offender.

Thus in Christ is the great problem solved. God is "just, and the Justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus." Is it more than a problem of the intellect to us? has it wrought itself out in our heart and life? T.F.L.

Vers. 21-31. Justification through faith in Christ.

The design of the Law, to intensify our sense of sin, having been made plain, the apostle, in the present paragraph, proceeds to show where justification comes from. It does not come from the Law; for the Law can only give us condemnation. It comes from a source foretold in "the Law and the prophets from Jesus Christ, our Propitiation. And more than justification, as we shall now see, proceeds from this marvellous source. Three leading thoughts are presented in this passage.

I ANTE-CHRISTIAN SIN WAS JUSTLY PASSED BY ON THE GROUND OF CHRIST"S PROMISED PROPITIATION. The picture the apostle gives us of the universal depravity and guilt of mankind suggests the inquiry How did God deal with it? And one undeniable fact was that in Old Testament times man"s wickedness was in many cases "passed by." Instead of executing speedy vengeance on human sin, God only flamed forth upon it occasionally, and during the intervening periods, or in the other places he seemed to "wink at" the wickedness, and passed it over in silence. The result in many cases was this, that because sentence against an evil work was not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men was fully set in them to do evil. (Ecc_8:11) If such was the result in some cases, how can we vindicate God"s procedure? Now, the apostle"s position in this passage is this that the "passing by" of sin, just as well as the pardon of sin, has its justification in the atonement of Christ. It will be well for us to consider for a moment what is secured by the passing by of ante-Christian sin. When we look into ante-Christian history, we see that, though God passed by a good deal of sin, he did not pass it all by. The Deluge, the vengeance taken on Sodom and Gomorrah, the trials of the children of Israel in the great and howling wilderness, the perils in the conquest of Canaan, the Egyptian and Babylonian invasions of Palestine, not to mention other instances, showed that God could, when he pleased, execute fierce vengeance upon man for his sins. But a vast amount of sin admittedly went unpunished. Now, strange as it may appear, to quote from a thoughtful writer, "this very imperfection in the execution of justice seems to be the strongest possible proof that, in the next world, vengeance will be fulfilled to the utmost. For observe, if we found that every man in this life received just what be deserved, and every evil work always brought swift punishment along with it, what should we naturally conclude? There is no future punishment in store: I see nothing wanting; every man has already received the due reward of his works; everything is already complete, and, therefore, there is nothing to be done in the next world. Or if, on the other hand, there were no punishment visited upon sin at all in the world, we might be inclined to say, "Tush! God hath forgotten;" he never interferes amongst us; we have no proof of his hatred of sin, or of his determination to punish it; he is gone away far from us, and has left us to follow our own wills and imaginations. So that if sentence were either perfectly executed upon earth, or not executed at all, we might have some reason for saying that there was a chance of none in a future world. But now it is imperfectly executed; just so much done, as to say, "You are watched, my eye is upon you; I neither slumber nor sleep; and my vengeance slumbereth not." And yet, at the same time, there is so little done, that a man has to look into eternity for the accomplishment." If God, by passing over ante-Christian sin, provided a chief argument for a world and judgment to come, then we can see how he could justly pass by the sin when he had promised in the Law and the prophets a propitiation. It is a difficulty with some to see exactly how "Christ tasted death for every man," even for those who will not accept of pardon But the respite more or less lengthy, which all sinners enjoy before the execution of deserved vengeance upon them, is owing to Christ"s propitiation. God can justly stay his hand, since the atoning sacrifice has been secured. In view of the promised propitiation, in ante-Christian times God"s righteousness was vindicated in passing by the sins of men and postponing their punishment. God"s justice was provided for, while he indulged his forbearance and passed over the sins of men.

II JUSTIFICATION WAS ALSO EXTENDED TO FAITH IN THE PROPITIATION OF CHRIST. Not only does Christ"s propitiation justify the Divine forbearance (ver. 25), as we have just seen, but it also justifies the pardon and acceptance of the believer. By trusting in the propitiation of Christ, we find ourselves justified from all things, from which w? could not be justified by the Law of Moses. The state of the case, as Paul here puts it, is this. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile as far as condemnation is concerned. We are all condemned, for we all sinned (hmarton is the aorist, and refers to a previous act, and this was, doubtless, man"s fall in Eden), and were destitute of God"s glory. But we come to see in Jesus Christ a divinely appointed and promised "propitiation" (ilasthrion), not surely a mere "mercy-seat," but an "atoning sacrifice" in whose shed blood we can trust (dia thv pistewv en ta autou aimati ); and on the ground of the satisfaction thus rendered to Divine justice by a Divine Redeemer, God can be just, and at the same time justify the believer in Jesus. "Perhaps," says Shedd, in his "Critical and Doctrinal Commentary," "the force of the middle voice should be insisted upon: "God set forth for himself." The atonement of Christ is a self-satisfaction for the Triune God. It meets the requirements of that Divine nature which is equally in each Person. "God hath reconciled us to himself (eautw)". (2Co_5:18, 19 Col_1:20) In the work of vicarious atonement, the Godhead is both subject and object, active and passive. God holds the claims, and God satisfies the claims; he is displeased, and he propitiates the displeasure; he demands the atonement, and he provides the atonement." And here we should be very clear about the perfectly gratuitous character of our justification, We are justified "freely" ( dwrean) by way of gift, as a matter of pure grace, our only possible relation to it being gratitude for a free gift. To trust in our propitiation, or rather in our Propitiator, is no more a merit than it is for a beggar to hold out his hand for alms. We do Christ the greatest injustice, we deny him his rights, so long as we refuse to trust him. Our pardon and acceptance as believers, therefore, are granted for the sake of Jesus Christ.

III NO BOASTING CAN BE BUILT ON THE LAW OF FAITH. (Vers. 27-31) Gratuitous justification, the apostle proceeds next to show, excludes all boasting. As we have seen, we have no merit before the Law, but stand condemned. We escape condemnation by a gratuitous justification extended to us on the ground of our Redeemer"s merits. Our faith in this loving, self-sacrificing Redeemer is only giving him his due! All who accept of justification, therefore, on these terms are excluded by this "law of faith" from boasting. We realize that we must make our boast only in the Lord. He is the sole ground of our confidence. The "deeds of the Law" do not enter into the question of our justification; good works come in the Christian life as the effect of our pardon and acceptance; we are "created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them". (Eph_2:10) Jew and Gentile have alike, therefore, to accept of justification as God"s free gift through the propitiation of Christ, and as grateful penitents to set about proving our gratitude through suitable good works. The Law is thus established, first, through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus; and, secondly, through the new obedience of the grateful and lowly minded believer. The magnificent plan of salvation, so far from proving any illegality, is entirely in the interests of law and order. What it secures is a mighty multitude of meek and lowly men, each one of whom feels laid under everlasting obligation through the gratuitous pardon and acceptance he has received through Christ, and bound in consequence to do all he can to prove how grateful he is. May we all belong to this self-emptied and lowly minded company! R.M.E.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But now the righteousness of God - That is, the manner of becoming righteous which God hath appointed. Without the law - Without that previous obedience which the law requires; without reference to the law, or dependence on it. Is manifested - In the gospel. Being attested by the Law itself, and by the Prophets - By all the promises in the Old Testament.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

righteousness of God

The righteousness of God is neither an attribute of God, not the changed character of the believer, but Christ Himself, who fully met in our stead and behalf every demand of the law, and who is, but the act of God called imputation Lev 25:50; Jas 2:23, "made unto us. . righteousness" 1Co 1:30.

"The believer in Christ is now, by grace, shrouded under so complete and blessed a righteousness that the law from Mt. Sinai can find neither fault nor diminution therein. This is that which is called the righteousness of God by faith."--Bunyan.

2Co 5:21; Rom 4:6; Rom 10:4; Php 3:9; Rom 3:26

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Our apostle having proved negatively, that by the works of the law righteousness and justification is not to be had for any person, be he Jew or Gentile: He comes now to prove the affirmative part of his assertion; namely, that the God hath manifested another way of justification in the gospel, to wit, by faith in Jesus Christ. "For, saith he, now, that is, since the coming of Christ, since the dispensation of the gospel; the righteousness of God, that is, the righteousness which God appoints, approves, and accepts for a sinner’s justification, is without the law, that is, without performing the works of the law, either natural, ceremonial, or moral; and is manifested to be the righteousness which is by faith in Christ; which all that believe and obey the gospel, shall be admitted to the participation of, both Jew and Gentile; for there is no difference; that is, no difference between Jew and Gentile, as to the way and means of their justification." And the reason assigned by the apostle, why there is, and can be, no other way of justification but this, we have in the next verse, namely, because all have sinned, the whole race of mankind , not one mere man excepted; and so will fall short of obtaining the glory of God and eternal life, if they seek it not in this way.

Learn hence, 1. That there is no standing or appearing before God for any creature, in a creature’s righteousness. There is much unrighteousness in our righteousness, and therefore we cannot stand justified before God in it. Besides, the wisdom of God has appointed another righteousness, or the righteousness of another, even the righteousness of Jesus Christ, to stand before him in: But now the righteousness of God is manifested, even the righteousness of God which is by faith in Jesus Christ.

Learn, 2. The necessity and excellency of faith; the righteousness of God is unto all, and upon all that believe: Faith is the bond of union, the instrument of our justification, the spring of our consolation: Being justified by faith, we have peace with God, Rom 5:1. Render we then unto faith the things which are faith’s, as well as unto Christ the things that are Christ’s.

Learn, 3. That in reference to, or in respect of, our justification before God, there is no differnece among believers, For there is no difference Rom 3:22; that is, no difference as to the way of justification, between Jew and Gentile, male and female, bond and free; but all, without the righteousness of faith in Christ, must die, and be damned to all eternity.

There is now a difference amongst believers, with respect to the degrees of glory in heaven, than others; but the justification of all believers is alike.

There is the same sin in all, not for measure and degree, but in respect of guilt and obligation to punishment:

There is the same price paid, by way of satisfaction to divine justice, for all; namely, the death of Christ:

There is the same rightesouness imputed to all, the same spirit of holiness imparted amongst all, and the same mansions of glory designed for all; thus there is no difference.

And there is no difference amongst believers, in respect of truth of grace, but much in respect of strength of grace;

no difference amongst them in respect of God’s promises, but much difference with respect of God’s covenant, but much difference in respect of God’s counsels, as also, in respect of God’s dispensations;

no difference in respect of God’s acceptation, but much in respect of their application;

no difference as they are a body, in respect of their head, but much difference as they are members of that head.

And if there be no difference amongst believers (as such) before God, why should there be so much difference amongst themselves, as there is oftentimes here in this world? You are all dear, truly dear to God; why should you not be so to one another? Why should not one church and one communion hold you now? Ere long, perhaps, one prison may, one heaven shall certainly hold you all.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21. “But now the righteousness of God is made manifest without law, being witnessed by the law and the prophets.” This righteousness of God is utterly independent of all law, because God Himself is the law-giver.

“Law” in this passage is without the article, showing that it excludes all law indiscriminately, while in the statement, “the law and the prophets,” having reference to the Mosaic law, we have the article. What is the righteousness of God? It is the righteousness (or justification, as they are synonymous) of God in Christ, i. e., the righteousness which Christ procured for us by His vicarious death. Our Savior has a righteousness peculiar to His divinity, and essential to it, which He will never give to another, but retain forever. He so has a righteousness peculiar to His humanity, and essential to it, which He will retain forever, and never give to another. Yet He has a third righteousness arising from His perfect obedience to the divine law, both keeping it actively and passively paying its penalty for us. This third righteousness, which is neither essential to His God-head nor His manhood, He procured not for Himself, as He did not need it, but for you and me. This righteousness is the only palladium that can possibly fortify us against the terrors of the violated law, and it is God’s glorious and munificent gift in Christ. Since it is a free gift, we do not have to give anything for it. The abandonment of all sin is indispensable to put us in position to receive it by simple faith, i. e., faith is the hand by which the soul receives it, i. e., the only spiritual faculty competent to receive it.

Hence, if we do not receive it by faith alone, we will never get it, and hell is our doom.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But now apart from the law a righteousness of God hath been manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets [Having shut up all under condemnation for sin under the law with its works, Paul turns now to point all to freedom and justification under the gospel with its grace. This section of the Epistle is, therefore, as Bengel observes, "the opening of a brighter scene." There was no justification under the Mosaic dispensation, says the apostle; but now, under the dispensation of Christ ( Rom_3:26 ; Rom_16:26 ), a righteousness apart from or independent of the law, having God as its author, and proceeding from God, and long hid in the councils of God, has been at last manifested ( Rom_16:25-26 ; 1Ti_3:16 ). Having thus distinctly announced this new justification, Paul proceeds to give details, the first of which is a statement that it did not come unannounced or unheralded, for in their types, promises and prophecies ( Gen_15:6 ; Hab_2:4 ) both the law and the prophets foretold that this righteousness would be revealed];

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

21. The righteousness of God without the law (Greek, without law) is manifested. A righteousness that does not spring from perfect obedience to law (without law), is predicted both by the law of Moses and the prophets of Israel.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

Connecting Statement:

The word "but" here shows Paul has completed his introduction and is now beginning to make his main point.

now

The word "now" refers to the time since Jesus came to the earth.

apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known

You can translate this in an active form. AT: "God has made known a way to be right with him without obeying the law" (See: Active or Passive)

It was witnessed by the Law and the Prophets

The words "the Law and the Prophets" refer to the parts of scripture that Moses and the prophets wrote in the Jewish scriptures. Paul describes them here as if they were people testifying in court. You can translate this in an active form. AT: "What Moses and the prophets wrote confirms this" (See: Personification and Active or Passive)

the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ

Here "righteousness" means being right with God. AT: "being right with God through trusting Jesus Christ" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

For there is no distinction

Paul implies that God accepts all people in the same way. AT: "There is no difference at all between the Jews and the Gentiles" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

translationWords

law

righteous

testimony

prophet

faith

believe

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

21–31. The failure of Jew and Gentile alike is met by the new dispensation of the Gospel, with the condition it demands of man, faith. The argument having explained ‘the revelation of wrath,’ returns to the statement of Rom 1:16-17, and amplifies it in a series of summary propositions, which are developed and explained in cc. 5 ff. (21) Under the present dispensation, in the absence of law, there has been an open declaration of GOD’s righteousness, not in itself new because it is the same righteousness as the law and the prophets declare, but new in the clearness of the declared condition by which it is to be attained by man, i.e. faith in Jesus Christ, and in its extension to all who have that faith, without distinction of race or person; (23) for as sin is found in all and all fall short of that divine likeness which GOD propounds to man, (24) so all are now declared righteous, without merit on their part, by GOD’s free act of grace, by means of that redemption and deliverance which is in Christ Jesus. (25) He is indeed GOD’s appointed agent of propitiation, on condition of faith, by the instrumentality of His Blood, shed to exhibit GOD’s righteousness which His patient endurance of men’s sins through so long a time had obscured, as the characteristic message of the present season, that in the knowledge of all He may be righteous and declare righteous all who begin with faith in Jesus. (27) So there is no resting on privilege, where faith is the one condition of acceptance with GOD, (28) a condition open to all mankind (29) corresponding to the fact that there is but one GOD for all men, who from covenanted and uncovenanted alike demands nothing but faith. (31) This view of GOD’s revelation, so far from annulling law, alone establishes it.

21. νυνὶ = ἐν τῷ νῦν καιρῷ, Rom 3:26, as things now are, under the Gospel dispensation.

χωρὶς νόμου, apart from law. The idea is that man no longer has to look to law as GOD’s revelation of Himself, but to the Person and character of Jesus Christ, not against or inconsistent with law but fulfilling it; cf. Hort, Jud. Chr. p. 19; 2Co 3:12-18.

δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ. GOD’s righteousness as characteristic of Him, and therefore the norm for human character; cf. Mat 5:48.

πεφανέρωται, has been made manifest, and stands there for all to see; of. Rom 16:26; 2Ti 1:10; Tit 1:3; esp. 1Pe 1:20; cf. Joh 1:11; Joh 1:14; 1Jn 1:2.

μαρτυρουμένη κ.τ.λ., so Rom 16:26 marks the continuity of GOD’s self-revelation: pres. part., because the law and the prophets still speak in the scriptures. The phrase sums up the O.T. revelation, the positive law and the comments of the prophets; cf. Mat 5:17; Mat 11:13; Joh 1:45; Act 28:23.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21-5:11.] The entrance into God’s righteousness (ch. 1:17) is shewn to be by faith.

21-26.] The Apostle resumes the declaration of ch. 1:17 (having proved that man has no righteousness of his own resulting from the observance of God’s law): viz. that God’s righteousness is revealed by Christ, whose atoning Death is, consistently with God’s justice, sufficient for the pardon of sin to those who believe in Him.

21. νυνί] Is this of time, ‘now,’ in contradistinction to ages past, = ἐν τῷ νῦν καιρῷ, ver. 26,—or is it merely = ‘as things are,’ ‘now we find?’ The former is held by Grot., Bengel, Tholuck, Reiche, Olsh., Rückert, al.,—the latter by Fritzsche, Meyer, and De Wette. The former is true in sense, and applicable to the circumstances of the gospel: but the meaning is too strong, where no contrast of time is expressly in view. I therefore prefer the latter, especially as Paul’s usage elsewhere justifies it; see ch. 7:17; 1Co 15:20.

χωρὶς νόμου] without the (help of the) law, ‘independently of the law:’ not ‘without the works of the law;’ for here it is not the way to the δικ. θεοῦ which is spoken of (which is faith), but that δικ. itself.

δικαιος. θεοῦ] God’s righteousness: in what sense, see ch. 1:17, and note.

πεφανέρωται] viz. in the facts of the gospel. The perfect sets forth the manifestation of this righteousness in history as an accomplished and still enduring fact—the ἀποκαλύπτεται of ch. 1:17 denotes the continual unfolding of this righteousness in the hearts and lives of faithful believers.

μαρτυρουμένη κ.τ.λ.] being borne witness to (pres. because the law and prophets remain on record as a revelation of God’s will) by the law and the prophets (not merely the types and prophecies, but the whole body of the O. T., see Mat 22:40).

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

21. νυνὶ δέ: ‘now,’ under the Christian dispensation. Mey. De W. Oltr. Go. and others contend for the rendering ‘as it is,’ on the ground that the opposition is between two states, the state under Law and the state without Law. But here the two states or relations correspond to two periods succeeding each other in order of time; so that νυνί may well have its first and most obvious meaning, which is confirmed by the parallel passages, Rom 16:25, Rom 16:26 μυστηρίου … φανερωθέντος … νῦν, Eph 2:12, Eph 2:13 νυνὶ δὲ … ἐγενήθητε ἐγγύς, Col 1:26, Col 1:27 μυστήριον τὸ ἀποκεκρυμμένον … νῦν δὲ ἐφανερώθη, 2Ti 1:9, 2Ti 1:10 χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσαν … πρὸ χρόνων αἰωνίων φανερωθεῖσαν δὲ νῦν, Heb 9:26 νυνὶ δὲ ἅπαξ ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων … πεφανέρωται. It may be observed (i) that the N. T. writers constantly oppose the pre-Christian and the Christian dispensations to each other as periods (comp. in addition to the passages already enumerated Act 17:30; Gal 3:23, Gal 3:25, Gal 3:4:3, Gal 3:4; Heb 1:1); and (ii) that φανεροῦσθαι is constantly used with expressions denoting time (add to passages above Tit 1:3 καιροῖς ἰδίοις, 1Pe 1:20 ἐπʼ ἐσχάτου τῶν χρόνων). The leading English commentators take this view.

An allusion of Tertullian’s makes it probable that Marcion retained this verse; evidence fails as to the rest of the chapter, and it is probable that he cut out the whole of ch. 4, along with most other references to the history of Abraham (Tert. on Gal 4:21-26, Adv. Marc. v. 4).

χωρὶς νόμου: ‘apart from law,’ ‘independently of it,’ not as a subordinate system growing out of Law, but as an alternative for Law and destined ultimately to supersede it (Rom 10:4).

δικαιοσύνη Θεοῦ: see on ch. 1:17. St. Paul goes on to define his meaning. The righteousness which he has in view is essentially the righteousness of God; though the aspect in which it is regarded is as a condition bestowed upon man, that condition is the direct outcome of the Divine attribute of righteousness, working its way to larger realization amongst men. One step in this realization, the first great objective step, is the Sacrificial Death of Christ for sin (ver. 25); the next step is the subjective apprehension of what is thus done for him by faith on the part of the believer (ver. 22). Under the old system the only way laid down for man to attain to righteousness was by the strict performance of the Mosaic Law; now that heavy obligation is removed and a shorter but at the same time more effective method is substituted, the method of attachment to a Divine Person.

πεφανέρωται. Contrast the completed φανέρωσις in Christ and the continued ἀποκάλυψις in the Gospel (ch. 1:16): the verb φανεροῦσθαι is regularly used for the Incarnation with its accompaniments and sequents as outstanding facts of history prepared in the secret counsels of God and at the fitting moment ‘manifested’ to the sight of men; so, of the whole process of the Incarnation, 1Ti 3:16; 2Ti 1:10; 1Pe 1:20; 1Jn 3:5, 1Jn 3:8: of the Atonement, Heb 9:26: of the risen Christ, Mar 16:12, Mar 16:14; Joh 21:14: of the future coming to Judgement, 1Pe 5:4; 1Jn 2:28. The nearest parallels to this verse which speaks of the manifestation of Divine ‘righteousness’ are 2Ti 1:10, which speaks of a like manifestation of Divine ‘grace,’ and 1Jn 1:2, which describes the Incarnation as the appearing on earth of the principle of ‘life.’

μαρτυρουμένη κ. τ. λ.: another instance of the care with which St. Paul insists that the new order of things is in no way contrary to the old, but rather a development which was duly foreseen and provided for: cf. Rom 1:2, Rom 3:31, the whole of ch. 4, 9:25-33; 10:16-21; 11:1-10, 26-29; 15:8-12; 16:26 &c.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Now [νυνι] Logical, not temporal. In this state of the case. Expressing the contrast between two relations - dependence on the law and non - dependence on the law.

Without the law. In a sphere different from that in which the law says "Do this and live."

Is manifested [πεφανερωται] . Rev., hath been manifested, rendering the perfect tense more strictly. Hath been manifested and now lies open to view. See on Joh 21:1, and on revelation, Rev 1:1 The word implies a previous hiding. See Mr 4:22; Col 1:26, 27.

Being witnessed [μαρτυρουμενη] . Borne witness to; attested. The present participle indicates that this testimony is now being borne by the Old Testament to the new dispensation.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.